Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Arbitration Is for Some But Not All
The defense of employment-related lawsuits is a significant expense for employers that, many times, cannot be avoided. At the same time, it is an expense that offers little return on investment for the employer. Despite the efforts of at least some courts to try to resolve these cases through early mediation or to move them faster through the system, claims of employment discrimination and other alleged wrongdoing in the workplace, often languish far too long.
The arbitration of employment-related claims has been advocated by some management-side employment counsel for years, as a means of reducing litigation expenses and limiting a company's exposure to large damage awards. There is little published empirical evidence, however, demonstrating whether the assumption that cost and exposure are actually limited proves to be true in a garden-variety, single employee dispute. One study of cases in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York suggests that there is little cost benefit to employers in arbitration. Certainly, in those instances where an arbitration program is challenged, there can be a significant cost. The premise of this article, however, which is based on anecdotal evidence, is that an arbitration program, while not a solution for all employers, properly implemented and administered, can indeed achieve the twin objectives of cost containment and limiting exposure in many cases.
Why Arbitration Is Cost-Effective
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?