Volume 108 Issue 1 Article 9 September 2005 Arbitration of Employer Violations of the West Virginia Human Rights Act: West Virginia Should Make Like Ants Marching and Continue Its Pursuit of Bliss Nicholas S. Johnson West Virginia University College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr Part of the Contracts Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, and the Labor and Employment Law Commons Recommended Citation Nicholas S. Johnson, Arbitration of Employer Violations of the West Virginia Human Rights Act: West Virginia Should Make Like Ants Marching and Continue Its Pursuit of Bliss, 108 W. Va. L. Rev. (2005). Available at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr/vol108/iss1/9 This Student Work is brought to you for free and open access by the WVU College of Law at The Research Repository @ WVU. It has been accepted for inclusion in West Virginia Law Review by an authorized editor of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. Johnson: Arbitration of Employer Violations of the West Virginia Human Rig ARBITRATION OF EMPLOYER VIOLATIONS OF THE WEST VIRGINIA HUMAN RIGHTS ACT: WEST VIRGINIA SHOULD MAKE LIKE ANTS MARCHING AND CONTINUE ITS PURSUIT OF BLISS 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................206 IH. "TRUE REFLECTIONS": BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON A RBITRATIONS .................................................................................208 A. The FederalArbitration Act ...................................................208 B. "What Would You Say?": Are Plaintiffs Better Off in Court or A rbitration? ............................................................................ 211 C. "Pay For What You Get": Ensuring Due Process Concerns in A rbitration.............................................................................. 2 13 D. "Save Me": The West Virginia Human Rights Act ................216 HI. "CRASH INTO ME": THE CONFLICT BETWEEN WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT AND UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASE LAW 217 A.