Pros And Cons Of Unconscionable Contract Law

Title VII Rights Act of 1964 forbids employers with 15 or more employees to discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, religion or national origin (EEOC, 1997). This law applies to federal, state and local employers. The above conditions may not be used to refuse to hire or for terminating an individual or in other words discriminate against any individual (EEOC, 1997). In order to release an employee in any of the above categories the employer must have documentation based on quantity or quality of production and the employer can also make this decision based on results of a professionally developed ability test, which cannot be used to discriminate (EEOC, 1997). If an employee feels they have been let go for an unjust reason they can file a formal

With arbitration at impasse, the union faces the prospect of management unilaterally continuing past terms without recourse to some other bargaining weapon.

Although the arbitrator’s final awards are legally binding, an unhappy party of arbitration may still go to court under certain circumstances.  As mentioned by Fallon & McConnell, “unless one party protests that there was a gross injustice, collusion, or fraud, arbitration that is specified by a contract can be converted into a legal judgment.  This requires a petition to the appropriate court” (n.d., p. 388).  As expected, this can become costly for the person who is seeking to appeal.

However, the ruling in this case and others like it prove that employers can, in fact, be bound by articles written in an employee handbook when disciplining or discharging an employee. An abysmally written handbook can greatly jeopardize an employer’s right to terminate at will. Trends show that courts are increasingly acknowledging enforceable promises in the past employment practices of firms, in employer handbooks and in oral commitments. In addition to including an at-will disclaimer in employee handbooks, employers should also require employees to sign an acknowledgment confirming that they understand and agree to employment-at-will and that at-will employment can at any time be modified by a written agreement. Personnel manuals should explicitly state that the employer reserves the right to terminate employment at will. All written policies should also be free of any language that could be considered as a guarantee of job security. To be sure that these common pitfalls are avoided employers must retain the service of a labor attorney to draft and air-tight employee manual and acknowledgment

Thesis: The Lakeside Packers case demonstrates that the province of Alberta requires the Labour Code to be amended to allow for First Contract Arbitration in the Collective Bargaining Process.

In the case of Nino v. The Jewelry Exchange, there were allegations brought forth by Rajae Nino who felt he was discriminated against by his former employer, on the account of his gender and national origin. When he was employed with said employer, he was given a copy of the company’s employment contract by the human resources manager and instructed him to read it and sign it without affording him any opportunity to negotiate over its terms. With most discrimination cases, “the EEOC encourages the parties to discrimination charges to use mediation” (Walsh, p. 20), with this case the employer invoked an arbitration provision in Nino’s employment contract wherein the Court of Appeals decided the arbitration agreement was unconscionable and therefore unenforceable. On the flip side, if the unconscionable terms were removed from the contract, the remainder of the employment contract could be enforced.

Yes, it is possible for the court to enforce the voluntary settlement agreement between the employer and NLRB without violating the immigration laws. As long as the illegal and the unlawful aliens are able to prove themselves about their work authorization they are safe (Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA, n.d.). If they are able to give some solid proof about themselves being legal they are enjoying the rights and the privileges, but only till then they are able to enjoy their rights. If they are proved to be illegal and are not able to give the proof about them being legal, they will be shown in the court. According to the Public Law 99-603 (Act of 11/6/86), was approved so as to control and organize the illicit migrants to the United States. Its main prerequisites lay down the legislation of some undocumented aliens who have been in continuation illegally present since 1982,

They are various employer tactics that interfere with employee’s “freedom of choice in being represented by their chosen advocates”. Unions may not try to influence management to discipline employees who did not join the union or refuse to represent employees because they are not union members. Some differences include that unions may not demand or require that an employer take action against an employer for any reason. A failure to pay union dues is an exception to this rule. Unions are also not allowed to force individuals to pay excessive initiation fees for union membership. In management, employers and unions may negotiate contract clauses requiring union membership as a condition of continued employment, also known as a union shop agreement. Also, employers may not refuse to bargain with an union over issues of pay, hours or other terms and conditions of employment. Furthermore, unions may not influence employees in the exercise of Section 7 rights. Meanwhile, in management an employer may not interfere with an employee engaging in any activity protected by Section 7. (Fossum,

Date Taken: Time Spent: Points Received: Question Type: # Of Questions: # Correct: True/False 25 25 Multiple Choice 25 25 Grade Details - All Questions  1. Question : After having signed a contract with a binding arbitration clause in it, an employer is legally bound to accept an arbitrator's decision on a particular issue even if they disagree with that decision.  Student

In cases where the EEOC determines that there is reasonable cause supporting the employee’s complaint, the EEOC must attempt to eliminate the unlawful employment practice through the conciliation process. When the conciliation process is unsuccessful, the EEOC may file a civil lawsuit against the employer. On the other hand, if the EEOC determines that there is no cause to support the employee’s complaint, then the EEOC issues a notice of right to file suit. When the EEOC issues a notice of right to file suit

See Consol. Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 220 (1938) (holding that the power of the Board to punish an employer who violates the NLRA is “remedial, not punitive.”); Republic Steel Corp. v. NLRB, 311 U.S. 7, 10

This paper will outline a complaint process and illustrate the civil litigation that could follow if the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, through mediation and arbitration cannot resolve a charge. The complaint is based on a scenario of an employee, named John. John works for a private sector business and he wishes to lodge a complaint of discrimination against the company he works for. This paper will explain the steps that are taken, from the beginning with the (EEOC), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The paper will continue explaining the process by illustrating the civil litigation steps from the state level to the highest level of the United States Supreme Courts.

The Court held an employer could not be compelled by the Act to do so if other channels of communication are available that allows the union to reach the employees, provided that the employer does not discriminate against the union by allowing other distributions. The Supreme Court stated that so long as the circumstances of the employment do not "place the employees beyond the reach of reasonable union efforts to communicate with them," respect for the employer 's property rights allow it to prohibit nonemployee access to its property. In doing so, the Court specifically differentiated the access rights of employees from those of nonemployees. The distinction [between employees and nonemployees] is one of substance. No restriction may be placed on the employees ' right to discuss self-organization among themselves unless the employer can demonstrate that a restriction is necessary to maintain production or discipline. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Labor Board, 324 U.S. 793, 803. But no such obligation is owed nonemployee organizers.” Ted Scott and Sara B. Kalis, Littler Mendelson, P.C.1.

From the case under study it is in line with the legal requirements that the TSA can file a legal petition for reinstatement (Cooper, 2012)., it is clear that the employer entered into this agreement knowingly and ready to abide by the rules and regulations only to deny doing as required by the law and refuse the reinstating of the employees The NLRB is guided by the National Labor Relations Act and has several responsibilities towards the employees. It is under the National Labor Relations Act that the employees who are not represented by a union get their rights protected. Some of the areas where they are assured of the protection are when employees wish to address their employer on pay, when the workers are discussing issues related to work beyond pay such as safety concerns, and when a worker speaks to the employer on behalf of other employees (Schwartz, 1983).

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) started in July 1935 to protect the rights of employees, rather, they be union or nor-union employees (Pozgar, 2012). The employees are protected under the Act or may employ in bubble-like, rigorous goings-on in situations other than the customary union organizations and cooperative bargaining. The National Labor Relations Board regulates the employers from interfering with the rights of the employees to implement or organize and join with a groups that offers assists with collective bargaining purposes like organization union or joining one (Pozgar, 2012). The employer may not restrain, coerce or stop employees