Compulsory Employment Arbitration and the EEOC

interpreting and applying the federal discrimination laws, thereby limiting civil rights provided by those laws.'° The EEOC, in addition to issuing this Policy Statement, has filed amicus briefs in support of employees attempting to void their arbitration agreements."The EEOC has also used its prosecutorial powers both to challenge the validity of arbitration agreements, 12 and to circumvent the effect of such agreements by litigating, in its own name, the underlying employment disputes which employees contractually have agreed to arbitrate.3 This Article examines the EEOC's opposition to compulsory employment arbitration, and evaluates its likely impact.Part II introduces the EEOC, focusing on the specific powers Congress has given or denied the agency to enforce the federal anti-discrimination laws.'Part III provides a brief history and overview of employment arbitration.5 Part IV analyzes the EEOC Policy Statement on employment arbitration, and considers whether and to what extent courts are likely to defer to it.'6 Part V discusses the EEOC's use of its prosecutorial powers to challenge and circumvent arbitration agreements, and examines the relevant and analogous case law.' 7 Part VI concludes that neither the EEOC's Policy Statement nor its litigation efforts are likely to have a substantial effect on the current judicial trend toward acceptance of employment arbitration agreements. II. THE EEOCThe EEOC was created 8 by Congress in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to administer that employment discrimination statute.9 Congress later expanded the EEOC's jurisdiction to include claims brought under the Age 10.See EEOC Policy Statement on Mandatory Arbitration, 133 Daily Lab.Rep.