Posts

California: AB 51 Update – Mandatory Arbitration Agreements are Back In?

APPLIES TO

All Employers with CA Employees

EFFECTIVE

January 31, 2020

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

As of January 1, 2020, AB 51 prohibited employers from requiring job applicants and employees to enter into arbitration agreements. However, on December 30, 2019, a federal district court issued a temporary restraining order preventing the state from enforcing the bill while a request for preliminary injunction was reviewed. After extensive legal argument, on January 31, 2020, the court issued a preliminary injunction with respect to arbitration agreements covered by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), preventing the bill from going into effect while its legality is resolved in court. On February 10, 2020, the court issued its ruling supporting the preliminary injunction. Employers with arbitration agreements that are not covered by the FAA (e.g., agreements with interstate truckers) are still subject to the terms of AB 51.

The legal community appears to uniformly indicate that this development means that employers subject to the FAA can continue to use mandatory arbitration agreements until further development in the federal court case challenging the bill. However, employers are recommended to consult with legal counsel on the best course of action before determining next steps.

Action Items

  1. Review arbitration agreements with legal counsel in light of the recent development.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2020 ManagEase

NLRB Changes Course on Mandatory Arbitration Agreements

APPLIES TO

All Employers Subject to the NLRA

EFFECTIVE

August 14, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In 2018, in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that employers may require employees to sign arbitration agreements with class action waivers. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) took the Epic decision even further.

Read more

Illinois: Harassment and Discrimination Updates for Employers

APPLIES TO

Certain Employers with IL Employees, as indicated

EFFECTIVE

January 1, 2020, unless otherwise noted

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Illinois’s legislature passed SB 75 and HB 252 providing increased protections against workplace harassment and discrimination. Key components are summarized below.

Read more

8th Circuit: Arbitration Agreements Must Be Enforceable Contracts

APPLIES TO

All Employers with AR, IA, MN, MO, NE, ND, and SD Employees

EFFECTIVE

July 15, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Shockley v. PrimeLending, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeal reminded employers that arbitration agreements must be enforceable contracts. There, the employer’s mandatory arbitration agreement and delegation clause existed only in its Handbook Addendum. The employee had received the Addendum electronically, which only required her to click on the Addendum link to generate an automatic acknowledgement that it was reviewed.  There was no evidence that the employee had actually ever opened the Handbook or Addendum and reviewed the arbitration policy.

Read more

California: State Supreme Court Takes a Heavy-Handed Look at Unconscionability in Arbitration Agreements

APPLIES TO

All Employers with CA Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 29, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Oto, LLC v. Kho, the California Supreme Court again pushed back on arbitration agreements in employment. The U.S. Supreme Court historically has said that states cannot discriminate against arbitration as a forum for resolving disputes or in favor of some disputes over others. Here, the California Supreme Court attacked the unconscionability of the agreement, meaning that the agreement was unfair in how it was presented to the employee.

Read more

Arbitration Agreements Must Exempt NLRA Claims According to the NLRB

APPLIES TO

All Employers Subject to the NLRA

EFFECTIVE

June 18, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Prime Healthcare, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) stated that an arbitration agreement that did not expressly exclude claims filed with the NLRB was invalid. There, the arbitration agreement simply required that all claims between the employer and employee be subject to arbitration. There were a few exceptions identified for workers’ compensation and unemployment claims, but not for National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) claims processed through the NLRB.

The Board stated that although the arbitration agreement did not expressly state that NLRB claims are subject to the arbitration agreement, because it called for “all claims” to be arbitrated, with limited exceptions, it restricted employees’ access to the NLRB and its processes. The Board ordered the employer to rescind the unlawful agreement and provide notice to current and former employees.

Employers should ensure that arbitration agreements expressly exclude NLRB claims. A general disclaimer excluding anything that would interfere with employee rights may not be sufficient.

Action Items

  1. Have arbitration agreements reviewed with legal counsel.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2019 ManagEase

New York: Get Ready for Expansive State Discrimination Law Reforms

APPLIES TO

All Employers with NY Employees

EFFECTIVE

As indicated

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The New York legislature recently passed an omnibus bill that will amend a number of existing laws, greatly expanding the state’s expansive workplace harassment and discrimination protections.  In addition, the amendments will cover all New York employers of any size. Governor Cuomo is expected to sign the bill shortly. Key changes are noted as follows.

Read more

California: Employees Can Provide Implied Consent to Arbitration Agreements Over Their Own Objections

APPLIES TO

All Employers with CA Employees

EFFECTIVE

April 10, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Diaz v. Sohnen Enterprises, the California Court of Appeal stated that an agreement to arbitrate employment disputes was formed by implied consent following notice to the employee. There, the employer notified its employees that it was changing the terms of its dispute resolution agreement, including requiring arbitration of all claims. A copy of the agreement was provided to employees, the terms were discussed in a staff meeting in English and Spanish, and the employees were told that continuing to work for the employer would constitute acceptance of the agreement, regardless if the agreement was actually signed. An employee subsequently indicated her refusal to sign the agreement but intended to continue working. She then filed a discrimination lawsuit against the employer.

Read more

Class Action Arbitration Cannot Be Compelled Without an Express Agreement

APPLIES TO

All Employers

EFFECTIVE

April 24, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, the U.S. Supreme Court recently stated that arbitration agreements must state an express agreement to arbitrate class claims between the parties; otherwise, claims brought on a class basis can be compelled to individual arbitration. There, an employee sued Lamps Plus for leaking private tax information that led to someone filing a fraudulent tax return under the name of the employee. Lamps Plus sought to compel arbitration of the employee’s claims; however, because the arbitration agreement was ambiguous about class claims, the lower courts allowed the employee’s class claims to proceed in arbitration.

Read more

Kentucky: Mandatory Arbitration is Again Permissible

APPLIES TO

All Employers with KY Employees

EFFECTIVE

March 25, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In September 2018, the Kentucky Supreme Court stated that mandatory arbitration agreements violate state law. Recently, the Kentucky legislature enacted SB 7 to change that ruling. The Bill specifically states that employers may require an employee or applicant to execute an arbitration agreement as a condition of employment. The arbitration agreement must state a reasonable location for the arbitration, apply to both parties, ensure procedural fairness, provide at least one channel for pursuing a legal claim (e.g., individual arbitration), and allow an arbitrator to award the same type of relief as would be available through a court of law.

The Bill applies prospectively and retroactively so as to eliminate the effects of the prior court case. Notably, this permission for mandatory arbitration agreements does not apply to collective bargaining agreements.

Action Items

  1. Have arbitration agreements reviewed by legal counsel for compliance with the new law.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2019 ManagEase