This page looks plain and unstyled because you're using a non-standard compliant browser. To see it in its best form, please upgrade to a browser that supports web standards. It's free and painless.
| « | December 2006 | » | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 | ||||||
Genetic Information
Realizing the Promise of Arbitration
Amendments to the FMLA
SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN PAY DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS
Six Things to Look for In Your Next Employment Contract
Michigan Codifies Garrity Rights for Law Enforcement Officers
Clarification of Garg and Evidence of Discrimination Occurring Outside the Statute of Limitations
Sixth Circuit Encourages En Banc Review of Arbitration Timeliness Disputes
Prescription Contraceptives
Michigan Minimum Wage Law
It has been a long-standing judicial precedent that the courts' jurisdiction in determining the arbitrability of arbitration agreements in a collective bargaining agreement is limited to determining whether the dispute is on its face governed by the contract. In other words, courts, not arbitrators, determine if the dispute is to be settled through arbitration. Arbitrators are to make the determination of procedural arbitrability (e.g. whether the parties have complied with procedural requirements under the agreement). (More)
August 2008
April 2008
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
December 2006
November 2006
August 2006
April 2006
Labor Law [3]

Employment Law [13]

TO OUR SHS Website
SHS HOME
PRACTICE AREAS
OUR ATTORNEYS
CONTACT INFORMATION