Employers in the gaming and hospitality arena are eagerly awaiting the results of the upcoming changes to the legal landscape that are expected to emerge from a business-oriented administration. These employers have long tried to reduce the costs and length of litigation, particularly in the context of wage and hour claims, by requiring employees to … Continue Reading
In a decision likely to have significant ramifications for employers, a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that employers cannot require employees to individually arbitrate their claims by way of “separate proceedings.” In Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP, No. 13-16599, D.C. No. 5:12-cv-04964 (9th Cir. August 22, 2016), … Continue Reading
In a 4-3 decision, the California Supreme Court recently determined that the question of “who decides whether [an arbitration] agreement permits or prohibits classwide arbitration” is not subject to a “universal rule [that] allocates this decision in all cases to either arbitrators or the courts.” See Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, Inc., Case No. S220812, 2016 … Continue Reading
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court again tackled the thorny issue of arbitration in light of the Federal Arbitration Act and struck down a California rule that effectively invalidated arbitration agreements that prevented class actions.
… Continue Reading
Many employers require that employees agree in writing to arbitrate any disputes that may arise in connection with their employment. The reason is simple: arbitrating employment disputes usually is less expensive and provides a quicker resolution than litigation. However, like litigation, arbitration can sometimes be unpredictable. This presents a problem because, unlike litigation, it is … Continue Reading