Compulsory arbitration and its impact on settling labor disputes in Yemeni legislation

Abstract

This study deals with Compulsory Arbitration and its impact on the settlement of labour disputes. It tackles two important questions; the first is to what extent this approach of settling disputes is constitutional? The second is about arbitration's nature; whether it is judicial or arbitral. The study aims at examining the Yemeni Labour Compulsory Arbitration Law and its relation with the Yemeni Constitution, showing its legal nature and acknowledging the shortcomings of labour committees.

The study adopts a descriptive and analytical methodology and is divided into two parts. The first focuses on what is arbitration, whereas the second looks into labour disputes and the committees of settlement.    

The study ends with some conclusions, the most important of which are the unconstitutionality of settlement committees and deficiencies in the substantive and procedural provisions regulating labour disputes. These deficiencies have a negative impact on the rights of workers. Consequently, this leads to failing to achieve the legislator' purpose of establishing these committees, which is speeding adjudication of cases. Thus, the study recommends the abolition of arbitration committees calling for establishing special judicial courts for quick adjudicating of labour cases.