The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear a trio of cases involving whether employers can use mandatory arbitration clauses to ban employees from bringing class action lawsuits over workplace disputes. A ruling is expected by the end of the Court's term in late June.
The 9th Circuit's ruling in Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP, deepens a split between the circuits, increasing the odds that the Supreme Court eventually will resolve the question of whether arbitration agreements may include class action waivers.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has held that graduate students who work as teaching and research assistants are statutory employees under labor law and, therefore, are entitled to unionize and collectively bargain for better working conditions.
In Miller & Anderson, Inc., the National Labor Relations Board has ruled that employer consent is not required for bargaining units that combine contingent and regular employees so long as the employees share a community of interest.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled, in Lewis v. Epic-Systems Corp., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9638 (7th Cir. 2016), that a health care software company's arbitration agreement violates the right of employees to engage in protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by barring them from participating in or pursuing wage-and-hour class action or collective claims. Because the ruling deepens a split among the circuits on this issue, it could lead to an eventual review by the Supreme Court to resolve the inconsistency.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.