Real Stories: EEOC v. Luce Howard
Donald Lagatree
EEOC v. Luce Howard
California
Donald Lagatree was offered a job at the law firm of Luce Howard. However, as a condition of employment, the firm asked that he sign a mandatory arbitration agreement, which would take away his option of ever suing his employer for employment discrimination-- no matter what.
Arbitration lacks the protections of the traditional U.S. justice system. It allows for minimal public accountability, limits the rights of claimants, and allows structural biases against plaintiffs that claim discrimination.
Because Mr. Lagatree refused to sign the agreement, his job offer was withdrawn. After bringing his case to the EEOC, the agency filed a claim of discrimination in federal court on his behalf. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that employers are not prohibited from requiring employees to agree to mandatory arbitration of employment disputes. The ruling followed the precedent of Circuit City v. Adams, a recent Supreme Court decision that limits the rights of employees to go to court when their civil rights are violated.
