On May 23, 2022, the Supreme Court ruled, in a decision that will potentially have wide ranging impact on the arbitration of potential class action disputes, that a party’s right to try to send a case to arbitration after first litigating does not depend on whether the delay prejudiced the other party. As a result, workers seeking to keep their cases out of arbitration no longer need to show prejudice when fighting a delayed arbitration bid. They only need to show that the employer waived its right to arbitration by engaging in conduct inconsistent with the […]
On November 15, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would hear a case by a former Taco Bell employee, Robyn Morgan, regarding her former employer’s right to compel arbitration in her wage and hour case. Morgan’s claims stem from her allegation that her former employer and Taco Bell franchisee, Sundance, Inc., failed to pay her time-and-a-half for overtime. Specifically, Morgan alleges that Sundance recorded her worktime across multiple weeks to keep her time under forty hours per week. Sundance answered Morgan’s Complaint and litigated the case for eight months. It then moved to compel arbitration […]
NLRB Finds Employers Can Modify Arbitration Agreements After Suit to Prohibit Participation in Collective Actions
On August 14, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that employers can revise mandatory arbitration agreements to prohibit employees from joining class and collective actions even after a suit has been filed. The NLRB further held that employers may condition continued employment on the execution of the amended agreement and threaten to terminate those who refuse. Neither action was found to violate Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act, which prohibits employers from interfering with employees’ union-related activities under Section 7 of the Act.
In the case at bar, a group of employees filed a […]
On April 24, 2019 the U.S. Supreme Court held that an ambiguous arbitration clause is not sufficient under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to force class arbitration on a non-consenting party. Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, No. 17-1988. The Court concluded that lower courts may not draw an inference from an ambiguous agreement that the parties consented to class arbitration and that neither silence nor ambiguity can establish a party’s consent to class arbitration under the FAA. This is because, according to the Court, parties’ consent to arbitrate is the foundational principle of arbitration agreements.
Lamps Plus […]