The Court’s majority agreed with the employers. The employer defendants countered by arguing that the FAA protects agreements requiring arbitration from judicial interference and that neither the FAA’s savings clause nor the NLRA demands a different conclusion. The employee plaintiffs sought to litigate Fair Labor Standards Act and related state law claims through class or collective actions in federal court, arguing that the individual arbitration clauses were not enforceable on the basis that the requirement of individualized proceedings violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and that the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) “savings clause”-which allows courts to refuse to enforce arbitration agreements “upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract”-removes an obligation to enforce arbitration agreements as written if the arbitration agreement violates some other federal law. Lewis, that arbitration clauses in employment contracts requiring individualized proceedings are enforceable and thereby preclude employees from bringing collective or class action suits regarding workplace claims. On May 21, 2018, in a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court held, in Epic Systems Corp.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |