<p>Welcome to Littler´s Employment Law Quiz! Fine-tune your knowledge of employment law while improving your employee relations skills at the same time. You can test yourself or send this quiz around to your managers. Good luck!</p>
<p><u><b>Employment Arbitration Agreements</b></u></p>
<p><i>Which of the following are NOT among the advantages of implementing a binding arbitration agreement as part of the hiring process?</i></p>
<p>A. Reduced litigation costs.</p>
<p>B. Faster resolution of disputes.</p>
<p>C. Greater protection of the parties´ privacy.</p>
<p>D. Increased predictability of results.</p>
<p>E. Increased ability to appeal unfavorable results.</p>
<p><b>The correct answer is E</b>. A recent study concluded that arbitration results in a 20% cost savings to the party. In the employment context, arbitration could result in at least a 50% reduction in litigation costs. Traditional litigation is often a time consuming process; arbitration generally offers faster resolutions, usually resolving a matter within 10 months. Arbitration offers greater privacy than a public courtroom where disputes may be highly publicized, depending upon the nature of the dispute and the parties involved. Generally an arbitrator has a proven track record because the arbitrator´s previous decisions, when available, can provide insight as to how he or she decides a case. The ability to review previous arbitration decisions provides increased predictability. In litigation, there is very little predictability with a jury. However, it is more difficult to appeal an adverse arbitration decision, and, thus, increased appellate options is not an advantage of arbitration.</p>
<p><!--Littler Mendelson--></p>
