Week 3 by 9/29
TOC \h \z \u \t "Heading 2,1" Topic 1 Due by Wed Oct 2: PAGEREF _Toc368407018 \h 2Topic 2A Due by Wed Oct 4: PAGEREF _Toc368407019 \h 3P Argument: PAGEREF _Toc368407020 \h 6Rule of Law: PAGEREF _Toc368407021 \h 6Conclusion: PAGEREF _Toc368407022 \h 6References PAGEREF _Toc368407023 \h 8
Each student has to post at least one main posting by WEDNESDAY 11:59 p.m., of each week and respond to all assigned discussion topics by FRIDAY, 11:59 p.m., leaving time for you to respond to postings of classmates between Saturday and Sunday’s close of the week. You must participate at a minimum of 3 days of the week. This minimal posting is necessary, but not sufficient, in order to earn a good evaluation.
Use standard English…show more content…
Termination of an employee while under binding arbitration agreement possibly constitutes a breach of contract by the employer, if it violates the rights of the individual employee.
The Court should not hear Mr. Compton’s case because the arbitration agreement that he acknowledged was in effect at the time of his termination. The binding arbitration agreement that Mr. Compton signed is also binding to the defendant, Merlotte. The termination case should be taken to the third party arbitrator to settle out of court. This is the reason for the arbitration agreement to save expenses on litigation for parties, the employee and the company.
The law clearly states the Supreme Court has held that binding arbitration is equally applicable to both parties. The law also states that “An employee’s agreement to arbitrate is clear when the employee signs an application form or agreement requiring arbitration, receives something of value from the employer, and is given a copy of the relevant arbitration rules.” CITATION Bag10 \p 92 \l 1033 (Bagley & Savage, 2010, p. 92)There is of course the possibility of recourse for the terminated employee, Mr. Compton, in a lawsuit filed by the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission0. The law states that “The EEOC may file a claim in court on its own behalf against an employer, even if the employee involved had entered into an enforceable