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.
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 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.
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...
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to legalize class action waivers in mandatory arbitration agreements suddenly hits play on numerous paused lawsuits by workers against their bosses.
Attorneys estimate that anywhere from hundreds to thousands of federal and state lawsuits or arbitration claims were on hold, awaiting the May 21 landmark ruling. In many of those cases—including wage-hour complaints against tech giants Uber, Grubhub, and Amazon—judges agreed to halt the lawsuits, pending the outcome that the justices have now provided.
The Supreme Court issued a 5–4 decision Monday in Epic Systems v. Lewis allowing employers to deprive their workers of their right to sue collectively. Its ruling, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, blasts a massive hole through post–New Deal labor law, hobbling employees’ ability to recover in court when their employers underpay them. It is difficult to overstate how devastating Epic Systems is to labor rights in America—and how far Gorsuch strays from federal law in order to implement his preferred economic policy.