Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Waffle House, Inc. (534 U.S. 279)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 15, 2002 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 534 U.S. 279 · 122 S. Ct. 754
- Decided
- January 15, 2002
- Term
- October Term 2001
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Stevens
- Issue area
- Unions
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court. The question presented is whether an agreement between an employer and an employee to arbitrate employment-related disputes bars the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from pursuing victim-specific judicial relief, such as backpay, reinstatement, and damages, in an enforcement action alleging that the employer has violated Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 104 Stat. 328, 42 U. S. C. § 12101 et seq. (1994 ed. and Supp. V). I In his application for employment with respondent, Eric Baker agreed that “any dispute or claim” concerning his employment would be “settled by binding arbitration.” As a condition of employment, all prospective Waffle House employees are required to sign an application containing a similar mandatory arbitration agreement. See App. 56. Baker began working as a grill operator at one of respondent’s restaurants on August 10,1994. Sixteen days later he suffered a seizure at work and soon thereafter was discharged. Id., at 43-44. Baker did not initiate arbitration proceedings, nor has he in the seven years since his termination, but he did file a timely charge of discrimination with the EEOC alleging that his discharge violated the ADA. After an investigation and an unsuccessful attempt to conciliate, the EEOC filed an enforcement action against respondent in the…
Excerpt of a 34,875-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.