ÿWPCç 3# ÚUNå %3 0G9U:€w@º4úL%qU:y 0J³ 0Tý 0^Q 0h¯ 0r 0|‰ 0† 0‹ 1u 0d 0@ô D34 Bg U>„ U* B)ì DC AQX Æ© 0Do 0D³ D/÷ B& AMC  v~–vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nL,Î(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX('\$¡¡Ô€XåÙXXMXÔ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular âãäåDæDçUèDéDêÓ€öB\J#FppDz3|xöC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT·"Arial Regular2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd* (Cþÿ << Gÿÿ üÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€%ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òOctober€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€%ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€ ÜXXdðXXdð7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌÌÌPATRICIA€J.€GUNBY€à àà àà à)Ìand€JANICE€HAMIL,à àà àà à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óPlaintiffs/Appellees,à àò ò)€€Shelby€Chancery€No.€107064„1€R.D.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)̜ـ*ÙßR€/0(A1-j|¬` Å `€€@ÿRß›VS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Appeal€Nos.€02A01„9606„CH„00140Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€and€02A01„9704„CH„00073ÌTHE€EQUITABLE€LIFE€ASSURANCEà à)ÌSOCIETY€OF€THE€UNITED€STATES,à à)ÌDAVID€BRYAN,€and€BOB€DUNHAM,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óDefendants/Appellants.à àò ò)ó óÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€SHELBY€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€MEMPHIS,€TENNESSEEÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€NEAL€SMALL,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌò òSTEPHEN€H.€BILLERÌMAURICE€WEXLERÌBAKER,€DONELSON,€BEARMAN€Ì&€CALDWELL,€P.C.Ìó óMemphis,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€AppellantsÌÌò òÌTIM€EDWARDSÌJAMES€F.€HORNERÌGLASSMAN,€JETER,€EDWARDS€&€WADEÌó óMemphis,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€AppelleesÌÌÌÌÌÌò òREVERSEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌœCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌLILLARD,€J.ó óà àÌÓÓà àIn›€œthese›€sexual€discrimination/sexual€harassment€œcases,€consolidated€onÏappeal,€›€Ñ7€ y XXdðXXdð7ÑPlaintiffs,€Patricia€Gunby€(ð ðGunbyðð)€and€Janice€Hamil€(ð ðHamilðð),€filed€suitÏagainst€Defendants,€The€Equitable€Life€Assurance€Society€of€the€United€States€(ð ðTheÏEquitableðð),€David€Bryan€(ð ðBryanðð)€and€Bob€Dunham€(ð ðDunhamðð),€seeking€damagesÏfor€Defendantsðð€alleged€acts€of€sexual€discrimination€and€sexual€harassment.€€TheÏDefendants€filed€a€motion€to€compel€arbitration€and€to€stay€the€action€pendingÏarbitration€or,€in€the€alternative,€to€dismiss.€€The€trial€court€denied€Defendantsðð€œmotions.›€ÏDefendants€appeal€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€arguing€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdenying€Defendantsðð€motion€to€compel€Plaintiffs€to€submit€their€claims€for€sexualÏharassment€and€sexual€discrimination€to€arbitration.€€For€the€reasons€stated€hereafter,Ïwe€reverse€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà@ àò òFACTSó óÌà àIn€April€1991,€Gunby€began€employment€with€The€Equitable€as€a€commissionedÏinsurance€salesperson.€€œIn›€August€1992,€Hamil€began€employment€with€The€EquitableÍas€a€commissioned€insurance€salesperson.€œUpon›€commencing€employment€with€TheÏEquitable,€Plaintiffs€executed€a€contract€entitled€Uniform€Application€for€SecuritiesÏIndustry€Registration€or€Transfer€(the€ð ðcontractsðð)€which€provided€in€part€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àœà8 àI›€agree€to€arbitrate€any€dispute,€claim€or€controversy€thatÏmay€arise€between€me€and€my€firm,€or€a€customer,€or€anyÏother€person,€that€is€required€to€be€arbitrated€under€theÏrules,€constitutions,€or€by„laws€of€the€[National€AssociationÏof€Securities€Dealers,€Inc.€(ð ðNASDðð)]€.€.€.€as€may€beÏamended€from€time€to€time.€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àAt€the€time€Plaintiffs€signed€the€contracts,€the€Code€of€Arbitration€ProcedureÏadopted€by€the€NASD€stated€in€part€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àœà8 àThis›€Code€of€Arbitration€Procedure€is€prescribed€andÏadopted€pursuant€to€Article€IV,€Section€2(b)€of€the€By„LawsÏof€the€National€Association€of€Securities€Dealers,€Inc.€(theÏAssociation)€for€the€arbitration€of€any€dispute,€claim€orÏcontroversy€arising€out€of€or€in€connection€with€the€businessÏof€any€member€of€the€Association,€with€the€exception€ofÏdisputes€involving€the€insurance€business€of€any€memberÏwhich€is€also€an€insurance€company:ÌÌà àà à(1)€between€or€among€members;ÌÌà àà à(2)€between€or€among€members€and€public€customers,€or€others;€andÌÌà8 àà8 à(3)€between€or€among€members,€registered€clearingÏagencies€with€which€the€Association€has€entered€into€anÏagreement€to€utilize€the€Associationððs€arbitration€facilitiesÏand€procedures,€and€participants,€pledgees€or€otherÏpersons€using€the€facilities€of€a€registered€clearing€agency,Ïas€these€terms€are€defined€under€the€rules€of€such€aÏregistered€clearing€agency.ÌÌNASD€(CCH)€ðð€3701€(June€1,€1990).ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àDuring€Plaintiffsðð€period€of€employment€with€The€Equitable,€the€NASD€amendedÏits€Code€of€Arbitration€Procedure,€which€became€effective€on€October€1,€1993.€ÏNASDððs€amended€Code€of€Arbitration€Procedure€provided€for€the€arbitration€of€€ð ðanyÏdispute,€claim€or€controversy€arising€out€of€or€in€connection€with€the€business€of€anyÏmembers€of€the€Association,€or€arising€out€of€termination€of€employment€of€associatedÏpersons€with€any€member.ð ð€€NASD€(CCH)€ðð€3703€(October€1,€1993).€Ìà àÌà àThroughout€Plaintiffsðð€employment€duration€with€The€Equitable,€Bryan€served€asÏthe€agency€manager€of€The€Equitableððs€Memphis€operation,€and€Dunham€served€as€aÏmanagement€employee€in€The€Equitableððs€Memphis€office.€ÌÌà àDuring€Plaintiffsðð€employment€with€The€Equitable,€Plaintiffs€allege€that€they€wereÏsubjected€to€disparate€terms,€conditions€and€opportunities€as€a€result€of€their€genderÏand€that€they€were€subjected€to€sexual€harassment.€€œPlaintiffs›€further€allege€that€theyÏwere€constructively€discharged€on€March€7,€1995.€€œOn€February€28,€1996,€PlaintiffsÏfiled€a€complaint€against€Defendants€in€the€Shelby€County€Chancery€Court€allegingÏviolations€of€the€Tennessee€Human€Rights€Act,€T.C.A.€ðð€4„21„101€òòet€seq.óó›ÌœÌà àà@ àò òLAWó óÌà àThe€sole€issue€before€this€Court€is€as€follows:€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdenying€Defendantsðð€motions€to€compel€Plaintiffs€to€submit€their€claims€for€sexualÏharassment€and€sexual€discrimination€to€arbitration.€€ÌÌà àIn€òòGilmer€v.€Interstate/Johnson€Lane€Corp.óó,€111€S.Ct.€1647€(1991),€the€UnitedÏStates€Supreme€Court€addressed€an€issue€similar€to€the€one€in€the€case€at€bar.€€TheÏPlaintiff,€Gilmer,€a€former€registered€securities€representative,€filed€suit€forÏdiscrimination€under€the€Age€Discrimination€in€Employment€Act€of€1967€(ð ðADEAðð),€29ÏU.S.C.€ðð€621€òòet€seqóó.€€The€sole€issue€presented€for€review€in€òòGilmeróó€was€whether€aÏclaim€under€the€ADEA€could€be€subjected€to€compulsory€arbitration€pursuant€to€anÏarbitration€agreement€in€a€securities€registration€application.€€Defendant,ÏInterstate/Johnson€Lane€Corporation€(ð ðInterstateðð),€hired€Gilmer€as€the€manager€of€itsÏfinancial€services€department€in€May€1981.€€As€required€by€Interstate,€GilmerÏregistered€as€a€securities€representative€with€several€stock€exchanges,€including€theÏNew€York€Stock€Exchange€(ð ðNYSEðð).€€Gilmerððs€registration€application€entitledÏð ðUniform€Application€for€Securities€Industry€Registration€or€Transferðð€provided,€òòinterÏaliaóó,€that€Gilmer€ð ðagree[d]€to€arbitrate€any€dispute,€claim€or€controversyðð€arisingÏbetween€him€and€Interstate€ð ðthat€is€required€to€be€arbitrated€under€the€rules,Ïconstitutions€or€by„laws€of€the€organizations€with€which€I€register.ðð€€òòGilmeróó,€111€S.Ct.€atÏ1650.€€Rule€347€of€the€NYSE€provided€for€the€arbitration€of€ð ð[a]ny€controversy€betweenÏa€registered€representative€and€any€member€or€member€organization€arising€out€of€theÏemployment€or€termination€of€employment€of€such€registered€representative.ðð€€òòIdóó.€atÏ1650„51.€€In€1987,€Interstate€terminated€Gilmerððs€employment.€€Gilmer€was€sixty„twoÏyears€of€age.€€€After€filing€an€age€discrimination€charge€with€the€Equal€EmploymentÏOpportunity€Commission€(ð ðEEOCðð),€Gilmer€filed€suit€in€the€United€States€District€CourtÏfor€the€Western€District€of€North€Carolina,€alleging€that€Interstate€had€discharged€himÏbecause€of€his€age,€in€violation€of€the€ADEA.€€Relying€upon€the€arbitration€agreementÍcontained€in€Gilmerððs€registration€application€and€upon€the€Federal€Arbitration€ActÏ(ð ðFAAðð),€9€U.S.C.€ðð€1€òòet€seqóó,€Interstate€filed€a€motion€to€compel€arbitration€of€GilmerððsÏADEA€claim.€€The€district€court€denied€Interstateððs€motion€to€compel€arbitration€basedÏupon€òòAlexander€v.€Gardner„Denver€Co.óó,€94€S.Ct.€1011€(1974)€and€its€progeny.€€InÏholding€that€the€age€discrimination€claim€was€subject€to€compulsory€arbitrationÏpursuant€to€the€arbitration€agreement€in€Gilmerððs€securities€registration€application,€theÏUnited€States€Supreme€Court€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIt€is€by€now€clear€that€statutory€claims€may€be€the€subject€ofÏan€arbitration€agreement,€enforceable€pursuant€to€the€FAA.€ÏIndeed,€in€recent€years€we€have€held€enforceableÏarbitration€agreements€relating€to€claims€arising€under€theÏSherman€Act,€15€U.S.C.€ðððð€1„7;€ðð€10(b)€of€the€SecuritiesÏExchange€Act€of€1934,€15€U.S.C.€ðð€78j(b);€the€civilÏprovisions€of€the€Racketeer€Influenced€and€CorruptÏOrganizations€Act€(RICO),€18€U.S.C.€ðð€1961€òòet€seqóó.;€and€ððÏ12(2)€of€the€Securities€Act€of€1933,€15€U.S.C.€ðð€77òòlóó€(2).€€SeeÏòòMitsubishi€Motors€Corp.€v.€Soler€Chrysler„Plymouth,€Inc.óó,Ï473€U.S.€614,€105€S.Ct.€3346,€87€L.Ed.2d€444€(1985);ÏòòShearson/American€Express€Inc.€v.€McMahonóó,€482€U.S.Ï220,€107€S.Ct.€2332,€96€L.Ed.2d€185€(1987);€òòRodriguez€deÏQuijas€v.€Shearson/American€Express,€Inc.óó,€490€U.S.€477,Ï109€S.Ct.€1917,€104€L.Ed.2d€526€(1989).€€In€these€cases€weÏrecognized€that€ð ðby€agreement€to€arbitrate€a€statutory€claim,Ïa€party€does€not€forgo€the€substantive€rights€afforded€by€theÏstatute;€it€only€submits€to€their€resolution€in€an€arbitral,Ïrather€than€a€judicial€forum.ðð€€òòMitsubishióó,€473€U.S.,€at€628,Ï105€S.Ct.,€at€3354.ÌÌòòGilmeróó,€111€S.Ct.€at€1652.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€a€strikingly€similar€case€to€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€United€States€Court€ofÏAppeals€for€the€Sixth€Circuit€in€òòWillis€v.€Dean€Witter€Reynolds,€Inc.óó,€948€F.2d€305€(6thÏCir.€1991)€addressed€the€issue€of€whether€a€registered€securities€representativeððsÍclaims€of€sexual€harassment€and€sexual€discrimination€against€her€brokerage€firmÏwere€subject€to€arbitration€pursuant€to€the€securities€registration€form€that€she€wasÏrequired€to€execute€in€order€to€perform€her€work€as€an€account€executive.€€Plaintiff,ÏLinda€Willis€(ð ðWillisðð),€originally€filed€an€action€for€sexual€harassment,€sexualÏdiscrimination,€common€law€contract€claims€of€outrage€and€breach€of€contract€in€stateÏtrial€court.€€Defendant,€Dean€Witter€Reynolds,€Inc.€(ð ðDean€Witterðð),€removed€the€case€toÏfederal€court€and€filed€a€motion€to€compel€arbitration€based€upon€Willisðð€execution€of€aÏSecurities€Registration€Form€U„4€and€upon€Willisðð€registration€with€various€nationalÏsecurities€exchanges,€including€the€NYSE.€€The€arbitration€clause€of€the€U„4€FormÏstated:€ð ðI€agree€to€arbitrate€any€dispute,€claim€or€controversy€that€may€arise€betweenÏme€and€my€firm,€or€a€customer,€or€any€other€person,€that€is€required€to€be€arbitratedÏunder€the€rules,€constitutions,€or€by„laws€of€the€organizations€with€which€I€register.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ïat€306.€€€Rule€347€of€the€NYSE€Rules€provided:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àAny€controversy€between€a€registered€representative€andÏany€member€or€member€organization€arising€out€of€theÏemployment€or€termination€of€employment€of€suchÏregistered€representative€by€and€with€such€member€orÏmember€organization€shall€be€settled€by€arbitration,€at€theÏinstance€of€any€such€party,€in€accordance€with€theÏarbitration€procedure€prescribed€elsewhere€in€these€Rules.ÌÌÓÓòòIdóó.€€Willis€thereafter€filed€a€motion€for€leave€to€amend€her€complaint€to€add€a€claimÏunder€Title€VII.€€The€district€court€subsequently€granted€Willisðð€motion€to€amend€herÏcomplaint,€granted€Dean€Witterððs€motion€to€compel€arbitration€on€Willisðð€breach€ofÏcontract€claims,€and€denied€Dean€Witterððs€motion€to€compel€arbitration€as€to€WillisððÏsexual€harassment,€sexual€discrimination€and€Title€VII€claims.€€òòIdóó.€€In€holding€that€theÏdistrict€courtððs€denial€of€Dean€Witterððs€motion€to€arbitrate€Willisðð€discrimination€claimsÍwas€in€error,€the€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€relied€largely€upon€the€SupremeÏCourtððs€decision€in€òòGilmeróó€and€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€plaintiffððs€arguments€which€suggest€that€somethingÏinherent€in€Title€VII€precludes€the€enforcement€of€validÏarbitration€agreements€in€circumstances€where€the€FAA€isÏotherwise€applicable€was€rejected€in€òòGilmeróó.€€Further,€whileÏðð€1€of€the€FAA€excludes€ð ðcontracts€of€employmentðð€from€theÏscope€of€the€FAA,€the€Supreme€Court€has€squarely€heldÏthat€arbitration€agreements€contained€in€a€securitiesÏregistration€application€such€as€the€one€at€issue€in€this€caseÏdo€not€constitute€contracts€for€employment.€€Thus,€ðð€1€of€theÏFAA€does€not€exempt€Willisðð€discrimination€claims€from€herÏagreement€to€arbitrate.ÌÌòòIdóó.€at€312.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€the€present€case,€Plaintiffs€argue€that€òòAlexander€v.€Gardner„Denver€Co.óó,€94ÏS.Ct.€1011€(1974),€and€its€progeny€prohibit€enforcement€of€the€arbitration€provisionsÏcontained€within€the€contracts€Plaintiffs€executed€regarding€Plaintiffsðð€claims€of€sexualÏharassment€and€sexual€discrimination.€€In€òòAlexanderóó,€the€Supreme€Court€addressedÏthe€issue€of€whether€a€union€employee€was€foreclosed€from€pursuing€an€action€underÏTitle€VII€of€the€Civil€Rights€Act€of€1964€(ð ðTitle€VIIðð),€42€U.S.C.€ðð€2000e€òòet€seqóó.,€after€heÏhad€been€unsuccessful€in€an€arbitration€compelled€by€his€collective€bargainingÏagreement.€€In€holding€that€the€employeeððs€statutory€right€to€a€trial€òòde€novoóó€under€TitleÏVII€is€not€foreclosed€by€prior€submission€of€a€claim€to€final€arbitration€under€theÏnondiscrimination€clause€of€a€collective€bargaining€agreement,€the€Supreme€CourtÏstated€that€ð ð[t]here€is€no€suggestion€in€the€statutory€scheme€that€a€prior€arbitral€decisionÏeither€forecloses€an€individualððs€right€to€sue€or€divests€federal€courts€of€jurisdiction.ðð€ÏòòAlexanderóó,€94€S.Ct.€at€1019.€€In€addressing€Plaintiffsðð€argument€that€the€SupremeÍCourtððs€decision€in€òòAlexanderóó€prohibits€the€enforcement€of€the€arbitration€provisionsÏcontained€within€the€contracts€Plaintiffs€executed€regarding€Plaintiffsðð€claims€of€sexualÏharassment€and€sexual€discrimination,€we€note€that€the€Supreme€Court€in€òòGilmeróó€andÏthe€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€in€òòWillisóó€addressed€this€same€argument.€€TheÏSupreme€Court€in€Gilmer€stated€that€the€òòAlexanderóó€line€of€cases€involved€the€issue€ofÏwhether€the€arbitration€of€contract„based€claims€precluded€subsequent€judicialÏresolution€of€statutory€claims,€not€the€enforceability€of€an€agreement€to€arbitrateÏstatutory€claims.€€In€distinguishing€the€òòGilmeróó€case€from€the€òòAlexanderóó€line€of€cases,Ïthe€Supreme€Court€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àFirst,€[the€òòAlexanderóó€line€of€cases]€did€not€involve€the€issueÏof€the€enforceability€of€an€agreement€to€arbitrate€statutoryÏclaims.€€Rather,€they€involved€the€quite€different€issueÏwhether€arbitration€of€contract„based€claims€precludedÏsubsequent€judicial€resolution€of€statutory€claims.€€Since€theÏemployees€there€had€not€agreed€to€arbitrate€their€statutoryÏclaims,€and€the€labor€arbitrators€were€not€authorized€toÏresolve€such€claims,€the€arbitration€in€those€casesÏunderstandably€was€held€not€to€preclude€subsequentÏstatutory€actions.€€Second,€because€the€arbitration€in€thoseÏcases€occurred€in€the€context€of€a€collective„bargainingÏagreement,€the€claimants€there€were€represented€by€theirÏunions€in€the€arbitration€proceedings.€€An€important€concernÏtherefore€was€the€tension€between€collective€representationÏand€individual€statutory€rights,€a€concern€not€applicable€toÏthe€present€case.€€Finally,€those€cases€were€not€decidedÏunder€the€FAA,€which,€as€discussed€above,€reflects€aÏð ðliberal€federal€policy€favoring€arbitration€agreements.ðð€ÏòòMitsubishióó,€473€U.S.,€at€625,€105€S.Ct.,€at€3353.€€Therefore,Ïthose€cases€provide€no€basis€for€refusing€to€enforceÏGilmerððs€agreement€to€arbitrate€his€ADEA€claim.ÌÌòòÓÓGilmeróó,€111€S.Ct.€at€1657.€€Similarly,€the€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€in€òòWillisóó€citedÏthe€foregoing€quotation€from€òòGilmeróó€and€held€that€the€Supreme€Courtððs€holding€inÍòòAlexander€óówas€inapplicable€to€the€facts€in€òòWillisóó.€€€òòSeeóó€òòWillisóó,€948€F.2d€at€307„308.ÌÌà àPlaintiffs€further€argue€that€the€contracts€they€executed€are€contracts€ofÏadhesion,€ones€which€are€dictated€by€employers€in€the€field€of€securities€sales€andÏwhich€are€forced€upon€all€persons€seeking€and€obtaining€employment€in€the€securitiesÏfield.€€The€Supreme€Court€addressed€a€similar€argument€in€òòGilmeróó€and€stated€thatÏð ð[t]he€unequal€bargaining€power€between€employers€and€employees€is€not€a€sufficientÏreason€to€hold€that€arbitration€agreements€are€never€enforceable€in€the€employmentÏcontext.ðð€€òòGilmeróó,€111€S.Ct.€at€1650.€€Here,€as€in€òòGilmeróó,€there€is€no€indication€thatÏPlaintiffs€were€coerced€or€defrauded€into€agreeing€to€the€arbitration€clause€containedÏwithin€the€contracts€they€executed.€€We,€therefore,€find€this€argument€of€the€Plaintiffs€toÏbe€without€merit.ÌÌà àIn€the€instant€case,€the€securities€registration€contracts€that€the€Plaintiffs€signedÏupon€commencing€their€employment€with€The€Equitable€were€the€same€contracts€thatÏthe€plaintiff€in€òòGilmeróó€and€the€plaintiff€in€òòWillisóó€had€signed.›€€Because€the€SupremeÏCourt€in€òòGilmeróó€held€that€Gilmerððs€age€discrimination€claim€was€subject€to€compulsoryÏarbitration€pursuant€to€the€arbitration€agreement€in€the€securities€registrationÏapplication€that€Gilmer€had€executed€and€because€the€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€AppealsÏin€òòWillisóó€held€that€Willisðð€sexual€harassment,€sexual€discrimination€and€Title€VII€claimsÏwere€subject€to€arbitration€pursuant€to€the€arbitration€agreement€in€the€securitiesÏregistration€œapplication›€that€Willis€had€œexecuted,›€we€find€that€the€Supreme€CourtððsÏanalysis€and€conclusions€in€òòGilmeróó€and€the€Sixth€Circuitððs€reasoning€in€òòWillisóó€compelÍthe€conclusion€that€the€arbitration€provisions€contained€within€the€contracts€PlaintiffsÏexecuted€apply€equally€to€Plaintiffsðð€sexual€harassment€and€sexual€discriminationÏœclaims.€€Furthermore,€the€Tennessee€Human€Rights€Act€specifically€provides€that€itÏembodies€the€policies€of€the€Federal€Civil€Rights€Act€of€1964,€1968€and€1972.€€T.C.A.€ððÏ4„21„101€(a)(1).›€€We,€therefore,€hold€that€the€Plaintiffsðð€claims€of€sexual€harassmentÏand€sexual€discrimination€shall€be€submitted€to€arbitration€in€accordance€with€theÏcontracts€signed€by€the€Plaintiffs.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€hereby€œreversed€and€this€matter€is€remanded€toÏthe€trial€court€for€entry€of€an€appropriate€order.›€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€€theÏAppellees€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€œnecessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àóóHIGHERS,€J.ÌCONCUR:ÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌLILLARD,€J.›