A recent Fifth Circuit opinion held that a company’s arbitration agreement did not prevent employees from pursuing their claims as a collective arbitration, rather than individual claims.  As class claims related to COVID-19 begin to surge, the opinion provides occasion for companies to review their arbitration agreements to ensure that the companies’ aims are clearly drafted.
Continue Reading As COVID-based Class Actions Loom, Fifth Circuit Provides Reminder for Arbitration Agreements and Class Action Waivers

California’s law against arbitration remains in doubt after Eastern District Judge Kimberly Mueller extended the TRO issued on December 31, prohibiting the state of California from enforcing the law against agreements covered by the Federal Arbitration Act.  That law, known as AB 51, seeks to prohibit companies in California from requiring arbitration agreements as a condition of employment.
Continue Reading California Court Extends TRO Against Arbitration Law

The body of law surrounding class action employment arbitrations received another jolt Monday when the Second Circuit revived an arbitration action with a potential class of roughly 70,000 employees. In Jock v. Sterling Jewelers, the Second Circuit overturned the district court and upheld an arbitrator’s decision to bind absent class members to the arbitration provisions of the company’s agreement.  The case represents another significant development in the realm of class arbitrations and class waivers, which have been the subject of significant recent litigation.
Continue Reading Second Circuit Revival of 70,000-Employee Class Action Adds Ripple to Uncertain Waters of Class Arbitrations

As we have previously reported, courts and the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) have released a number of recent decisions favoring the enforceability of arbitration agreements in the employment context. It is now settled law that class-action waivers in arbitration agreements do not violate the National Labor Relations Act or infringe on employees’ Section 7 rights under the Act.  In a recent decision, the NLRB extended this holding to allow employers to implement arbitration programs—including those with class-action waivers—in direct response to litigation by its employees.


Continue Reading NLRB Allows Employers To Implement Mandatory Arbitration Programs In Direct Response To Being Sued

Earlier this year, we wrote about a proposed bill in California, AB 51, which would prevent employers from requiring their employees to bring all employment-related claims, including discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wage and hour claims, in arbitration instead of state or federal court.  Earlier this month, Governor Newsom signed AB 51 into law.
Continue Reading California’s Anti-Arbitration Bill Gets Signed Into Law

This month, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed several employment-related bills into law. The laws go into effect January 1, 2020, and include an extension to the deadline to file certain state discrimination claims and address harassment training and prevention, as well as mandatory arbitration agreements.
Continue Reading New California Laws Increase Employee Protections

In a recent decision, the California Supreme Court refused to overturn an arbitrator’s award, despite finding the award was incorrect.  Specifically, the Court held that an arbitrator should have considered evidence of a rejected section 998 settlement offer and changed its cost award, even after issuing a final arbitration decision.  However, the Supreme Court determined a trial court does not have authority to correct this error. The ruling emphasized the broad scope of an arbitrator’s powers and narrow scope of judicial review when the parties choose arbitration. 
Continue Reading CA Supreme Court: Arbitrator’s Error Cannot Be Reviewed By Court