• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


NLRB Trend Citing Murphy Oil in Class Waiver Cases Continues

0
by Beth Graham

Wednesday, Dec 21, 2016


Tweet

Late last month, a National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) administrative law judge issued an order in Private National Mortgage Acceptance Co., LLC and Richard Smigelski, No. 20-ca-170020 (November 29, 2016).  In the case, the NLRB judge found that a mortgage lender, PennyMac, maintained an unlawful mandatory binding arbitration policy for its employees in violation of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).  According to the administrative law judge, PennyMac’s collective action waiver that was also a condition of employment was illegal under the law.

The judge stated:

This is another in a long line of cases involving whether (a) an employer can require its employees to agree, as a condition of continued employment, to utilize arbitration as an alternative to the judicial process for resolving employment disputes; and (b) whether an employer can require employees, as a condition of continued employment, to waive their ability to file class action claims. (Whether in a court or before an arbitrator).

It is the Board’s current position, despite reversals by several Circuit Courts, that an employer will violate Section 8(a)(1) of the Act when it requires its employees to utilize arbitration to resolve employment disputes and when it precludes employees from acting in concert to bring class actions, whether in court or before an arbitrator.

In my capacity as an Administrative Law Judge of the NLRB, I am bound to follow Board precedent irrespective of contrary opinions by Circuit Courts, unless and until the Supreme Court makes a definitive ruling on the subject matter in dispute.

Therefore, this case is controlled by the Board’s decision in Murphy Oil USA, Inc., 361 NLRB No. 72 (2014), enf. denied 808 F.3d 1013 (5th Cir. 2015).  In Murphy Oil and subsequent cases, the Board has consistently held that requiring employees to sign class action waivers, with or without an “opt out” clause, is a violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.

Further, in light of the manner in which the MAP provisions are broadly drafted, I conclude that employees would have a reasonable basis for concluding that they would be precluded from filing charges with the National Labor Relations Board. In the absence of some reasonable explanation to employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act, the minimal statement to the effect that the MAP excludes charges filed with the Board is, in my opinion, insufficient to assure employees that their rights to file charges with the National Labor Relations Board have not been adversely affected. Solar City Corp., 363 NLRB No. 83, slip op. at page 6 (2015).

Finally, in light of current Board precedent, I must reject the Respondent’s contention that its Motions to compel individual arbitration were protected by the First Amendment’s Petition Clause. The Supreme Court in Bill Johnson’s Restaurants v. NLRB, 461 U.S. 731,731–743 (1983), noted that there were two situations where such legal actions do not enjoy the Amendment’s protection. The first is where the action is outside the State Court’s jurisdiction because of Federal preemption.  And the second is where the action seeks to enforce a matter which is illegal under Federal law. The Board has therefore restrained litigation efforts that have an illegal objective of curtailing employees’ Section 7 rights. Murphy Oil, supra, slip op.at 20–1, Convergys Corp., 363 NLRB No. 51, slip op. at fn. 5 (2015).

The NLRB administrative law judge then ordered the mortgage lender to stop maintaining or enforcing the mandatory arbitration policy and the proceeding was transferred to the Board.

This decision is especially timely as the United States Supreme Court is currently considering numerous petitions for certiorari related to the question of whether a class waiver included in an employer’s alternative dispute resolution provision is permissible under the NLRA.  Please stay tuned to this blog for future developments on this interesting issue!

Photo credit: 401(K) 2013 via Foter.com / CC BY-SA

Related Posts

  • NLRB Files Responsive Brief in Murphy Oil CaseNLRB Files Responsive Brief in Murphy Oil Case
  • California Supreme Court Finally Recognizes Class and Collective Arbitration WaiversCalifornia Supreme Court Finally Recognizes Class and Collective Arbitration Waivers
  • National Labor Relations Board Issues Guidelines for Employers’ Arbitration PoliciesNational Labor Relations Board Issues Guidelines for Employers’ Arbitration Policies
  • SCOTUS to Consider Murphy Oil, Epic Systems, and Ernst & Young TodaySCOTUS to Consider Murphy Oil, Epic Systems, and Ernst & Young Today
  • SCOTUS to Hear Oral Argument in Murphy Oil on October 2ndSCOTUS to Hear Oral Argument in Murphy Oil on October 2nd
  • NLRB Directs Regional Offices to Informally Settle Pending Cases Involving Class Waivers in an Employer’s Arbitration AgreementNLRB Directs Regional Offices to Informally Settle Pending Cases Involving Class Waivers in an Employer’s Arbitration Agreement

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy