The Wagner Act, now called the NLRA, gave employees the right to form unions and go on strike. It also created the NLRB to enforce these rights. Employees can now use social media to improve working conditions, and there’s even an NLRB app for information. But there’s still disagreement over the limits of these rights. One big debate now is whether employees can join together to sue their employer, and whether agreements that waive this right are unfair. The NLRB made two big decisions saying that it’s illegal for employers to make employees sign agreements that stop them from joining together in lawsuits. Even though some courts disagreed, the NLRB is standing firm. This means employers will have a tough time enforcing these agreements until the courts or Supreme Court step in. Before the NLRB got involved, most courts and the Supreme Court generally supported arbitration agreements with class action waivers. The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) makes these agreements valid and enforceable, and the Supreme Court has consistently favored arbitration agreements.
In the context of employment, class and collective-action waivers have also been upheld. The Supreme Court found no right to class actions under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the 11th Circuit approved the use of collective-action waivers in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Despite some arguments against these waivers, the courts have generally supported their enforceability.
So, before the NLRB got involved, it was generally accepted that arbitration agreements with class action waivers were valid and enforceable. In 2012, the NLRB made a decision in the case of D.R. Horton, a big home building company. The decision said that the company’s arbitration agreements violated the rights of its employees to work together for better pay and conditions. The company had made its employees agree to individual arbitration and not join together as a group. When an employee tried to file a complaint with the help of other employees, the company said no. The NLRB said this was wrong and that employees have the right to work together for better conditions. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that employees have the right to file class action lawsuits for workplace issues. But the Fifth Circuit Court disagreed, saying that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is equally important and that requiring class action in arbitration goes against the FAA. This decision caused problems for the D.R. Horton company. The NLRB found in the Murphy Oil decision that it still believes workers have the right to engage in class or collective actions, despite court decisions disagreeing with them. This could lead to a split in the circuits and may eventually go to the U.S. Supreme Court. The NLRB issued a decision saying that workers have a right to work together to sue their employer, even if their contract says they can’t. Some members of the board disagreed and think the decision will be challenged in the Supreme Court. It’s a big deal for workers’ rights. Member Miscimara disagreed with the majority on the issue of whether employees and employers are allowed to enter into agreements that waive collective or class procedures. He gave four reasons for his belief that the board is wrong. Member Johnson openly criticized the board for not following the instructions of the Supreme Court and for ignoring the opinions of many federal and state courts.
In simpler terms, Miscimara disagreed with the majority on the issue of whether employees and employers are allowed to enter into agreements that waive collective or class procedures. Johnson criticized the board for not following the instructions of the Supreme Court and for ignoring the opinions of many federal and state courts. In the Murphy Oil case, the NLRB made a decision that goes against what many courts have ruled. This decision could cause more cases and delays. Unless the Supreme Court steps in and changes the decision, it will have a big impact on future cases. Until a court decision settles the issue, employers may still face legal action for enforcing their arbitration agreements. This was seen in the Citigroup case, where employees filed a collective action but the American Arbitration Association declined to hear it. The NLRB then recommended that Citigroup reimburse the employees for their legal expenses. The issue is likely to be addressed in the 11th Circuit next, and until it is resolved, employers in certain areas will continue to deal with prolonged legal battles. These are references to various laws and court cases related to labor disputes and employment contracts. They include the Federal Arbitration Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and cases involving companies like Toyota, Ernst & Young, and Citigroup. The cases discuss issues such as arbitration agreements, the minimum wage, and overtime pay.
Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/practical-implications-of-murphy-oil-on-employee-waivers-an-ecological-disaster-or-a-dissenters-pipeline-to-freedom/
Leave a Reply