Thursday, January 16, 2014

You Can No Longer Take Your Company to Court

10 out of the 14 judges were chosen by Reagan or GW Bush
There are 3 vacancies.
An example of why the Republicans are trying so hard to block President Obama from making judicial appointments. These posts are lifetime appointments, like the supreme court.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/01/16/You-Can-No-Longer-Take-Your-Company-Court

by Rob Garver The Fiscal Times
January 16, 2014

In 2006, the nationwide home-building company D. R. Horton, began requiring all new employees – and any existing employees who wanted to keep their jobs – to sign an agreement saying that they agreed to “voluntarily waive all rights to trial in court before a judge or jury on all claims” between the employee and the company. They would submit, instead, to binding arbitration.

Not only did employees who signed the agreement waive their right to participate in a class action lawsuit, they also waived their right to participate in class-based arbitration. The National Labor Relations Board in 2012 ruled that the agreement was illegal, but last month the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans overturned that ruling.
- See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/01/16/You-Can-No-Longer-Take-Your-Company-Court#sthash.Q0XTOfyW.dpuf

The ruling has some labor lawyers concerned that if the appeals court ruling is upheld, clauses barring class action lawsuits and class arbitrations could quickly become standard elements in most employment contracts, effectively barring many non-unionized workers from a tool that has historically been used to vindicate workers’ rights.

Catherine K. Ruckelshaus, general counsel and program director for the National Employment Law Project, said that because of under-funding of agencies that enforce labor laws, class action “has been pretty much the only game in town” for workers looking for relief from abusive employers. “If you can’t aggregate the claims, there is very little pressure on the employer,” said Ruckelshaus.

In recent years class actions have been used successfully to challenge the practice of making employees work “off the clock” at major retailers and to require that overtime pay be given to workers illegally classified as exempt from overtime requirements.

-----

Mandatory arbitration clauses are not new, and are not unique to employment contracts. They are a common feature of credit card contracts and other financial agreements. (And are currently being examined by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.) They have also, for example, historically been a part of employment contracts for executive-level and other high-ranking employees in the financial services industry.

-----

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) have sponsored a bill, the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2013, which would bar companies from requiring employees and consumers to consent to binding arbitration prior to a dispute arising. Consent to binding arbitration would still be allowed after a dispute has arisen.

-----

“The Board is very likely to continue to enforce the law and maintain that these kind of clauses are unlawful,” continued Meisburg, who is now a partner and co-head of the Labor-Management Relations Practice Group at the Proskauer law firm in Washington, DC. “So for the time being, maintaining these contract clauses puts companies at risk of NLRB prosecution and an adverse decision.”

A number of other cases, however, including two that are working their way through the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, have many labor attorneys convinced that the Supreme Court is likely to weigh in on the issue in the near future.

No comments:

Post a Comment