An arbitration agreement should be enforced against an employee who entered into the agreement upon completion of a training module and continued working there, a U.S. District Court judge has decided.
The plaintiff brought a discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against his former employer, the defendant for violations of 42 U.S.C. §1981, the Michigan Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration, arguing that the plaintiff entered into a “DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND MUTUAL AGREEMENT TO BINDING ARBITRATION” (the “Arbitration Agreement” or the “Agreement”) when he used a unique ID and password to complete the “Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Disputes – all but California 2022” training, “Acknowledged” his completion of the training, then continued his employment at the defendant company.
“In response to this motion, [the plaintiff] argues that completion of a training module does not constitute assent to a valid and enforceable contract, especially when the agreement is unsigned and there was no notice that completion of a training module would manifest assent to arbitrate. … The Court disagrees,” Judge Brandy R. McMillion wrote.
“Even if a party did not sign an arbitration agreement in the traditional sense, an attestation such as ‘clicking “Acknowledge”’ can suffice. … A binding arbitration agreement does not require a party’s signature. … That [the plaintiff] did not physically sign the...
[OSEN=Jang Woo-young Reporter] Amid repeated denials from actor Park Si-hoo’s side regarding allegations of facilitating an affair, a close associate also emphasized that the claims are “baseless”...