How far does the Federal Arbitration Act's policy favoring arbitration go? Given the recent personnel changes on our highest court, the newest U.S. Supreme Court decisions on arbitration of employment disputes, Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon and Morgan v. Sundance Inc., shed light on the future of employment arbitration.
New Jersey transportation companies gained some new leverage in fighting employment class actions after the state Supreme Court reinforced employers' arbitration agreements under Garden State law, even if their workers are exempt from arbitration under a federal law.
President Donald Trump is transforming the courts, winning his 200th judicial confirmation Wednesday. Here, we look at the impact those judges have had on employment law, from employer-friendly rulings on arbitration to the recent landmark U.S. Supreme Court win for gay and transgender workers.
San Francisco Daily Journal - Jahan Sagafi and Michelle Erickson
Concerned with the success of the civil rights and women's rights movements in the 1960s and cultural challenges to corporate power, conservatives in the 1970s planned their legal revolution. In recent decades, this effort has borne fruit. Ballooning corporate power and substantial erosion of the public sphere have caused a yawning chasm between rich and poor. One of the conservative legal architects' greatest achievements is forced arbitration: the privatization of the public court system coupled with attacks on one of the strongest tools for civil law enforcement - the class action.
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to bless class action waivers in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis was seen as a clear-cut win for employers, but on its first birthday, practitioners say the decision's impact has been muted as businesses weigh the potential costs of arbitration and growing public backlash against denying workers a day in court.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Tuesday ruling that transportation workers, regardless of whether they're employees or independent contractors, are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act chipped at the shield some employers have long relied on to insulate themselves from legal attacks, experts say.
A California appeals court decision sinking Winston & Strawn LLP's arbitration agreement with a former attorney suing the firm for discrimination will encourage "for hire" lawyers and others outside firms' power structures to fight contracts that seek to block legal disputes from reaching the courtroom, experts say.
Most Big Law partners would probably hesitate to file a lawsuit or pursue a dispute in arbitration against their firms. After all, it’s likely to present that lawyer with in an unenviable choice: continuing to work alongside fellow partners as the legal claim remains active, or attempting to move elsewhere with the hope that the suit doesn’t stain future job prospects.
Worker advocates worry Supreme Court decision allowing class action waivers and arbitration agreements may chill #MeToo and #TimesUp
Internal policies, outside resources remain viable avenues for addressing harassment
The #MeToo movement set in motion last fall hit a bit of a speed bump this month when the Supreme Court gave employers the green light to use arbitration clauses and class action waivers in employment contracts. But that doesn’t mean the book is shut on the #MeToo movement or its legal advocacy...
Although employers scored a landmark win Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workers can be barred from pursuing class claims, the decision could prove to be a double-edged sword, since businesses face the prospect of footing the bill for an avalanche of individual arbitration demands workers may file. Here's a look at how plaintiffs will forge ahead now that the ruling is on the books.
A five-justice majority led by Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled that businesses aren't violating the National Labor Relations Act by including class waivers in arbitration agreements that workers...