Mandatory Employment Arbitration

Literature Cited

1. Am. Const. Soc 2022. Diversity of the federal bench. Rep., Am. Const. Soc. Washington, DC: https://www.acslaw.org/judicial-nominations/diversity-of-the-federal-bench/
2. American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, 570 U.S. 228 2013.)
3. AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 2011.)
4. Chandrasekher A. 2021. An empirical investigation of diversity in U.S. arbitration Work. Pap., Univ. Calif. Davis: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3903718
5. Chandrasekher AC, Horton D. 2019. Arbitration nation: data from four providers. Calif. Law Rev. 107:1–66
   [Google Scholar]
6. Chesnokova S. 2019. Arbitration of employment claims globally. Employer Report June 21. https://www.theemployerreport.com/tag/international-arbitration/
   [Google Scholar]
7. Clermont KM, Schwab SJ. 2004. How employment discrimination plaintiffs fare in federal court. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 1:2429–58
   [Google Scholar]
8. Cohen TH. 2008. General civil jury trial litigation in state and federal courts: a statistical portrait. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 5:3593–618
   [Google Scholar]
9. Cole SR. 2021. Arbitrator diversity: Can it be achieved?. Wash. Univ. Law Rev. 98:965–95
   [Google Scholar]
10. Colvin AJS. 2003. The dual transformation of workplace dispute resolution. Ind. Relat. 42:4712–35
    [Google Scholar]
11. Colvin AJS. 2008. Empirical research on employment arbitration: Clarity amidst the sound and fury?. Empl. Rights Employ. Policy J. 11:2405–47
    [Google Scholar]
12. Colvin AJS. 2011. An empirical study of employment arbitration: case outcomes and processes. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 8:11–23
    [Google Scholar]
13. Colvin AJS. 2018. The growing use of mandatory arbitration Rep., Econ. Policy Inst. Washington, DC: https://www.epi.org/publication/the-growing-use-of-mandatory-arbitration-access-to-the-courts-is-now-barred-for-more-than-60-million-american-workers/
14. Colvin AJS. 2019. The metastisization of mandatory arbitration. Chicago-Kent Law Rev. 94:13–24
    [Google Scholar]
15. Colvin AJS, Gough MD. 2015. Individual employment rights arbitration in the U.S.: actors and outcomes. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 68:51019–42
    [Google Scholar]
16. Colvin AJS, Pike K. 2014. Saturns and Rickshaws revisited: What kind of employment arbitration system has developed?. Ohio State J. Dispute Resolut. 29:159–83
    [Google Scholar]
17. Eigen ZJ, Sherwyn D. 2016. Deferring for justice: how administrative agencies can solve the employment dispute quagmire by endorsing an improved arbitration system. Cornell J. Law Public Policy. 26:21
    [Google Scholar]
18. Eisenberg T, Hill E. 2003. Arbitration and litigation of employment claims: an empirical comparison. Dispute Resolut. J. 58:444–55
    [Google Scholar]
19. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 584 US __ ( 2018.)
20. Estlund C. 2018. The black hole of mandatory arbitration. N.C. Law Rev. 96:679–709
    [Google Scholar]
21. Estreicher S. 2001. Saturns for rickshaws: the stakes in the debate over predispute employment arbitration agreements. Ohio State J. Dispute Resolut. 16559–70
    [Google Scholar]
22. Galanter M. 1974. Why the “haves” come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9:195–160
    [Google Scholar]
23. Gen. Account. Off 1995. Employment discrimination: Most private sector employers use alternative dispute resolution Rep. GAO/HEHS 95–150 Gen. Account. Off. Washington, DC:
24. Gilmer v. Interstate/JohnsonLane Corp., 500 US 20 ( 1991.)
25. Glover JM. 2006. Beyond unconscionability: class action waivers and mandatory arbitration agreements. Vanderbilt Law Rev 59::1735–70
    [Google Scholar]
26. Glover JM. 2022. Mass arbitration. Stanford Law Rev. 74:1283–392
    [Google Scholar]
27. Gough MD. 2014. The high costs of an inexpensive forum: an empirical analysis of employment discrimination claims heard in arbitration and civil litigation. Berkeley J. Employ. Labor Law 35:1–291–112
    [Google Scholar]
28. Gough MD. 2016. Employment lawyers as gatekeepers: how employment arbitration affects employee access to justice. Adv. Ind. Labor Relat. 22:105–34
    [Google Scholar]
29. Gough MD. 2018. How do organizational environments and mandatory arbitration shape employment attorney case selection? Evidence from an experimental vignette. Ind. Relat. 57:4541–67
    [Google Scholar]
30. Gough MD. 2020. Characteristics and professional practices of labor and employment arbitrators. Arbitr. Law Rev. 12:117–38
    [Google Scholar]
31. Gough M. 2021. A tale of two forums: employment discrimination outcomes in arbitration and civil litigation. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 74:4875–97
    [Google Scholar]
32. Gough MD, Colvin AJS. 2020. Decision-maker and context effects in employment arbitration. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 73:2479–97
    [Google Scholar]
33. Gough MD, Taylor Poppe ES 2020. (Un)Changing rates of pro se representation in federal court. Law Soc. Inq. 45:3567–89
    [Google Scholar]
34. Green MZ. 2020. Arbitrarily selecting black arbitrators. Fordham Law Rev. 88:2255–87
    [Google Scholar]
35. Horton D, Chandrasekher AC. 2016. Employment arbitration after the revolution. DePaul Law Rev. 65:457457–60
    [Google Scholar]
36. Klass BS, Mahony D, Wheeler H. 2006. Decision-making about workplace dispute: a policy-capturing study of employment arbitrators, labor arbitrators, and jurors. Ind. Relat. 45:168–93
    [Google Scholar]
37. Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 US ___ 2019.)
38. LaRue H, Symonette A. 2019.. Diversity and inclusion in arbitrator selection or “I select who I know.” Pap., Am. Bar Assoc. Chicago: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/labor_law/2019/annual-conference/papers/diversity-and-inclusion-in-arbitrator-selection.pdf
39. Nielsen LB, Nelson RL, Lancaster R. 2010. Individual justice or collective legal mobilization? Employment discrimination litigation in post-civil rights United States. J Empir. Legal Stud. 7:175–201
    [Google Scholar]
40. Oppenheimer DB. 2003. Verdicts matter: An empirical study of California employment discrimination and wrongful discharge jury verdicts reveals low success rates for women and minorities. Univ. Calif. Davis Law Rev 37:535–49
    [Google Scholar]
41. Pham ND, Donovan M. 2022. Fairer, faster, better III: an empirical assessment of consumer and employment arbitration Rep., Inst. Legal Reform, US Chamb. Commerce Washington, DC:
42. Racabi G. 2022. Abolish the employer prerogative, unleash work law. Berkeley J. Employ. Labor Law 43:179–138
    [Google Scholar]
43. Resnik J. 2015. Diffusing disputes: the public in the private of arbitration, the private in courts, and the erasure of rights. Yale Law J 124:2804–939
    [Google Scholar]
44. Sherwyn D, Estreicher S, Heise M. 2005. Assessing the case for employment arbitration: a new direction for empirical research. Stanford Law Rev 57:1557–91
    [Google Scholar]
45. St. Antoine TJ 2008. Mandatory arbitration: why it's better than it looks. Univ. Mich. J. Law Reform 41:4783–812
    [Google Scholar]
46. Staszak S. 2015. No Day in Court: Access to Justice and the Politics of Judicial Retrenchment. Stud. Postwar Am. Political Dev Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
47. Staszak S. 2020. Privatizing employment law: the expansion of mandatory arbitration in the workplace. Stud. Am. Political Dev. 34:2239–68
    [Google Scholar]
48. Stipanowich TJ, Lamare J. 2014. Living with ADR: evolving perceptions and use of mediation, arbitration, and conflict management in Fortune 1,000 corporations. Harvard Negot. Law Rev. 19:1–68
    [Google Scholar]
49. Stone KVW, Colvin AJS. 2015. The arbitration epidemic Brief. Pap. 414 Econ. Policy Inst. Washington, DC:
50. Ware S. 2017. The centrist case for enforcing adhesive arbitration agreements. Harvard Negot. Law Rev. 23:29–121
    [Google Scholar]