10.2190/V27C-U02F-CMJQ-10F7 V27CU02FCMJQ10F7 227 REDUCING POST-TERMINATION DISPUTES: A NATIONAL SURVEY OF CONTRACT CLAUSES USED IN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS 227 241 20020923 20020923 20020923 20020923 V27CU02FCMJQ10F7.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=V27CU02FCMJQ10F7 3 WILLIAM P. GALLE Jr. CLIFFORD M. KOEN University of New Orleans, Louisiana The increased popularity of employment contracts in recent years is due to several factors, including a tight labor market, frequent mergers and acquisitions, and greater concern by employers over trade secrets and other intellectual property. Many disputes involving employers and former employees could be eliminated and the potential for litigation greatly reduced if the issues that often give rise to complaints were addressed in an "up-front" employment contract. This article examines issues that may be addressed at the time of contracting. Part I describes the most popular and potent clauses used in employment contracts. Part II contains a report based on a national survey of human resource professionals. The findings from this study suggest that the different clauses are applicable only in certain cases--for certain employee types and certain companies. Other than issues of compensation and the protection of proprietary information, there is little agreement on the use of the thirty-two clauses identified for this study. Employers use a variety of provisions to tailor the employment contract to their particular needs. Circuit City v. Adams, 121 S. Ct. 1302 (2001). Farragher v. City of Boca Raton, 118 S. Ct. 2275 (1998). Edward E. Lawler, III, S. A. Mohrman, & G. Benson (2001). Organizing for Higher Performance, Jossey-Bass, p. 212. Ellerth v. Burlington Industries, 118 S. Ct. 2257 (1998). W. M. Carley (1998). Secrets Suit: What Did He Know? Wall Street Journal, January 20, p. B1. Gilmer v. Interstate Johnson Lane Corp., 111 S. Ct. 1647 (1991).