Wow! That is all I could say after I read the recent NLRB decision holding that an employer’s requirement that employee sign mandatory arbitration agreements waiving the right to litigate claims in a collective or class action violates the National Labor Relations Act.
In the case styled D.R. Horton, Inc. and Michael Cuda
I have written some of the disadvantages of arbitration over other procedural methods of resolving cases such as waivers of jury trial. (See post and post). However, in an opinion from the Supreme Court of Texas, one disadvantage of arbitration (i.e., the limited appellate review of arbitration awards that is available) can be minimized
It is pretty difficult for a party to get an adverse arbitration award reversed or vacated. A recent Dallas Court of Appeals decision shows the rare instance were such a reversal occurred. In Alim v. KBR (Kellogg, Brown & Root) –Halliburton, the Dallas court held that an arbitrator’s failure to disclose, in an employment discrimination, breach of
Don Cruse at the Supreme Court of Texas Blog, wrote about the first case of the new term on which the Supreme Court of Texas requested full briefing —Hatton v. D.R. Horton, Inc. that case involves an issue of significant importance to Texas employers. According to Don, this case
concerns the enforceability of arbitration clauses in
Texas courts routinely enforce arbitration agreements between employers and their employees. In most parts of the state, lawyers representing employees agree to go to arbitration upon being presented with a copy of an arbitration agreement signed by the plaintiff-employee. On occasion, however, there are disputes over the enforceability of an arbitration agreement. The Supreme Court
In a non-employment case of significant importance to employers and employment lawyers, the U.S. Supreme Court held today that imposing class arbitration on parties who have not agreed to class arbitration is inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and is therefore not permitted. This case arose out of an MDL antitrust case alleging that certain competitors were engaged in
Texas courts strongly favor the resolution of disputes through arbitration. When parties to a dispute have signed an agreement to arbitrate covered disputes, Texas courts will rarely disregard that agreement. A recent per curiam opinion of the Supreme Court of Texas continues that trend by conditionally granting mandamus relief in a case alleging national origin discrimination
The U.S. Supreme Court completed its 2008-09 term. On the docket were five cases of interest dealing with employment law. Here is a summary of the holdings in those cases.
I just returned from Tulane University Law School’s 27th Annual Multi-State Labor and Employment Law Seminar held at the La Cantera resort in San Antonio, Texas. (See brochure here). Attendees and presenters at this conference are some of the finest and most experienced labor and employment lawyers in the country. During my three days at the conference, I did
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court held that provisions in collective bargaining agreements that clearly and unmistakably require union members to submit statutory discrimination claims to the grievance and dispute resolution provisions of the agreement are binding and enforceable.
In 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett , a dispute arose over a commercial office building’s reassignment of night watchmen employees