Validity of the Arbitration Clause in the International Employment Contract: the Viewpoint of the GCC Countries

Q3 Social Sciences
Sharaf Khaled Al-Sharaf, Anas Faisal Al-Tourah
{"title":"Validity of the Arbitration Clause in the International Employment Contract: the Viewpoint of the GCC Countries","authors":"Sharaf Khaled Al-Sharaf, Anas Faisal Al-Tourah","doi":"10.12775/clr.2023.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we will evaluate the significance of the arbitration clause in international employment contracts. Our aim is to understand how this particular alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism is utilized in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Even though the law in several countries aims to protect employees by prohibiting arbitration agreements (due to considerations of employee protection), we argue that it should be optional for the employee to enter into labour agreements with arbitration clauses. This is especially important when the arbitration agreement achieves the employees’ interests, and is agreed upon with informed and clear consent. We will engage with arguments which advocate the prohibition of arbitration agreements within Individual Employment Contracts (IECs); whilst taking the position that the flexibility, speed, confidentiality and predictability of arbitration provides specific advantages to international employees compared to litigation before court. Furthermore, in the context of a desire on the side of GCC countries to attract high-skilled labour (and when there are many misconceptions regarding the adjudicative functions of labour law courts in the GCC), arbitration clauses can play a significant role in mediating between different legal cultures.","PeriodicalId":36604,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Law Review","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12775/clr.2023.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper we will evaluate the significance of the arbitration clause in international employment contracts. Our aim is to understand how this particular alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism is utilized in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Even though the law in several countries aims to protect employees by prohibiting arbitration agreements (due to considerations of employee protection), we argue that it should be optional for the employee to enter into labour agreements with arbitration clauses. This is especially important when the arbitration agreement achieves the employees’ interests, and is agreed upon with informed and clear consent. We will engage with arguments which advocate the prohibition of arbitration agreements within Individual Employment Contracts (IECs); whilst taking the position that the flexibility, speed, confidentiality and predictability of arbitration provides specific advantages to international employees compared to litigation before court. Furthermore, in the context of a desire on the side of GCC countries to attract high-skilled labour (and when there are many misconceptions regarding the adjudicative functions of labour law courts in the GCC), arbitration clauses can play a significant role in mediating between different legal cultures.
国际雇佣合同中仲裁条款的有效性:海湾合作委员会国家的观点
在本文中,我们将评价仲裁条款在国际雇佣合同中的意义。我们的目的是了解这种特殊的替代性争端解决机制是如何在海湾合作委员会(GCC)国家中使用的。尽管一些国家的法律旨在通过禁止仲裁协议来保护员工(出于对员工保护的考虑),但我们认为,对于员工来说,签订带有仲裁条款的劳动协议应该是可选的。当仲裁协议符合员工的利益,并在知情和明确的同意下达成一致时,这一点尤为重要。我们将参与主张在个人雇佣合同(IECs)中禁止仲裁协议的论点;同时,我们认为与法庭诉讼相比,仲裁的灵活性、速度、保密性和可预测性为国际雇员提供了特殊优势。此外,在海湾合作委员会国家希望吸引高技能劳工的背景下(当对海湾合作委员会劳工法法院的裁决职能存在许多误解时),仲裁条款可以在不同法律文化之间发挥重要的调解作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Comparative Law Review
Comparative Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信