Clinton Cole V. Burns International Term Paper

As such, any valid arbitration agreement will be accordingly handled and implemented by the arbitrators on the case.

4) What specific steps can be taken effectively to change this legal outcome in future cases?

In the case of Clinton Cole vs. Burns International Security Services, the Court decided against the plaintiff's request to render void the arbitration agreement signed by employee on the 5th of August 1991. In order to change the outcome of future similar legal cases, the employees need better arguments as to why the arbitration agreement should be considered null by the Court. Also, to convince the Court to rescind the agreement, the plaintiffs and their lawyers should focus on the issues that are not covered by the arbitration agreement.

For instance, employees could point out how the agreement refers to the "recruitment, employment and termination of employment by the Company; including, but not limited to, claims involving laws against discrimination whether brought under federal and/or state law, and/or claims involving co-employees but excluding Worker's Compensation Claims." In this order of ideas, plaintiffs could argue that the contract is incomplete and unfair.

On the other hand, to minimize the chances of going to court, employees should clearly analyze and understand the contract prior to signing it. They should consult a lawyer who would advise them on the risks assumed by their signature on the arbitration agreement. Several companies allow their future employees to take the contract and go through it with a judiciary assistant.However this is a good practice, candidates feel pressured to sign the contract, as their hiring is conditioned by their signature on the agreement. "You may wish to consult an attorney prior to signing this agreement. If so, take a copy of this form with you. However, you will not be offered employment until this form is signed and returned by you."

5) Is this a wise policy for organizations?

Having employees sign an arbitration agreement and renounce their right to take their accusations to a jury court is an extremely wise policy for organizations. First of all, the agreement signed is a valid contract and it is enforceable under the law. Second of all, when litigation appears, the company is significantly advantaged by their possibility to resolve the problem within an arbitrary court.

Accusations resolved by authorized arbitrators are being handled in a more private manner than the cases resolved by a judge or jury court. This privacy aids the employer preserve his reputation. Then, an arbitration agreement generates reduced costs compared to a judiciary court and it also requires less time to resolve the litigations.

Bibliography

Clinton Cole vs. Burns International Security Services, 105 F.3d 1465 (D.C.1997)

NASD Arbitration, the Banks Law Office, http://www.bankslawoffice.com/nasd-arbitration.php, last accessed on October 3, 2007

Edwards, Chief Judge, Summary of Opinion

Background of the Case

NASD Arbitration, the Banks Law Office.....