[20010112]98-940A_强制性仲裁协议的可执行性：.pdf

1Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp., 525 U.S. 70 (1998).Congressional Research Service ? The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS Web98-940 AUpdated January 12, 2001Enforceability of Mandatory ArbitrationAgreements: Wright v. UniversalMaritime Service Corp.Jon O. ShimabukuroLegislative AttorneyAmerican Law DivisionSummaryIn Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court found thata mandatory arbitration clause in a collective bargaining agreement was not enforceablebecause it failed to specify arbitration as the covered employees sole method of obtainingrelief for their statutory claims. Without such explicit language in the agreement, theunion could not have made a clear and unmistakable waiver of the employees rightsto a judicial forum. Although the Court identified a clear and unmistakable waiverstandard for determining whether a mandatory arbitration agreement could be enforced,it refrained from deciding whether a union could actually bargain for such a waiver.Arbitration and other forms of alternative dispute resolution have become increasinglymore common as employers and employees seek faster resolutions and lower liti