Document Type


Publication Date



Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp, Arbitration as technique, Arbitration as public policy, Arbitration as self-regulation, Internal labor market, Psychological contract, Employment relationship, Discrimination, FAA, Federal Arbitration Act, OCB, Organizational citizenship behavior, Boundaryless career


Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | Labor and Employment Law


Since the Supreme Court's decision Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. which compelled an employee to submit his age discrimination claim to arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), there has been a dramatic increase in the number of nonunion firms adopting arbitration systems. At the same time, there has been a flood of lawsuits challenging these employment systems, and a corresponding avalanche of judicial opinions addressing the legal issues left open in Gilmer – issues such as the problematic nature of consent in employment arbitration, the deficiencies in due process, and the applicability of the FAA to employment contracts. These developments comprise the past and the present of employment arbitration, and were explored at length at the Symposium. This article addresses the future of dispute resolution in the workplace. The workplace is changing in ways that make arbitration, as well as other types of dispute resolution, more important than ever. In the changing workplace, it might be possible to design an arbitration system that would help to promote workplace fairness.

Publication Citation

Katherine Van Wezel Stone, "Dispute Resolution in the Boundaryless Workplace," 16 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 467 (2001).