Originally from:
AAA Handbook on Employment Arbitration and ADR - 2nd Edition - Hardcover
AAA Handbook on Employment Arbitration and ADR - 2nd Edition - Electronic
Preview Page - CHAPTER 10
ADR: THE HALLIBURTON EXPERIENCE
William L. Bedman*
I. Introduction
As in-house labor counsel for the last twenty-four years at
Halliburton/Kellogg-Brown & Root (Halliburton),1 one of the world’s
largest energy services companies, I have seen many changes in how workplace disputes are handled. Litigation had long been the only acceptable method of dispute resolution. But courts once hostile to arbitration have accepted it and hold that mandatory employment arbitration agreements that meet certain requirements are enforceable.
While arbitration has flourished, mediation and other conciliatory
processes have developed and hold great promise to resolve workplace disputes.
II. The Litigation Model
The reliance on litigation to resolve individual employment disputes
did not evolve from logical necessity. Rather, it was the result of legal and historical forces that developed outside the private employment context. These forces include the role of labor unions, the civil rights movement and the expansion of tort law.
Before World War I, the type of employment-related disputes most
often litigated was the claim of personal injury in the workplace. When a
William L. Bedman is Assistant General Counsel of Human Resources, specializing in labor and employee relations, for Halliburton Company and has been with that company for the past twenty-five years. He is the legal architect for the Halliburton Dispute Resolution Program and is involved with the administration of the Program. He received a B.A. from Tulane University and earned his law degree from the University of Texas School of Law.
