Walexron Arbitration Case Study

The arbitration statute has been around for many years. “In 1920, New York enacted the first arbitration statue in the United States, giving parties the right to settle current disputes and resolve future ones through private arbitration” (Bagley, 2016). Congress, in 1925 passed the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) which is an act requiring courts to honor agreements to arbitrate and arbitration awards (2016). Walexron, a publicly traded US multinational corporation, was created by the consolidation of a large discount retailer and energy company with the intent to become one of the most powerful and efficient companies in the world (South University Online, 2018). South University Online lecture states that “over the past two years, Walexron had 36 claims brought to arbitration by employees. All 36 claims were arbitrated by the same dispute resolution agency selected by Walexron” (2018). This paper will discuss the questions asked in the lecture. The questions

Perez, when first hired, signed an arbitration agreement that was in the employee handbook. Walexron filed a petition to compel arbitration. The first question asked in the lecture is: Will Manuel Perez prevail in invalidating the arbitration clause? I believe Perez will succeed in getting the motion to compel arbitration dropped. Due to the additional facts that were given in the course material about Walexron and Perez, there is more than one reason that the motion to compel arbitration would be denied. It stated that when Perez was hired by Walexron in 2009, in which he was given the employee handbook to sign. Within the employee handbook was the arbitration policy. By Perez signing that he received the handbook, he agreed to the policies within it. It is stated that Perez asserted that English was not his first language and he had difficulty reading and understanding the handbook (South University,