• 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


California Bans Mandatory Arbitration Agreements as a Condition of Employment

0
by Beth Graham

Monday, Nov 11, 2019


Tweet

California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed a law that prohibits employers in the state from requiring workers to sign a mandatory arbitration provision as a condition of employment.  AB 51 mandates that an “employer shall not threaten, retaliate or discriminate against, or terminate any applicant for employment or any employee because of the refusal to consent to the waiver of any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act or this code, including the right to file and pursue a civil action or a complaint with, or otherwise notify, any state agency, other public prosecutor, law enforcement agency, or any court or other governmental entity of any alleged violation.”  AB51 “does not apply to a person registered with a self-regulatory organization as defined by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 78c) or regulations adopted under that act pertaining to any requirement of a self-regulatory organization that a person arbitrate disputes that arise between the person and their employer or any other person as specified by the rules of the self-regulatory organization.”

Interestingly, a violation of AB51 is a misdemeanor under California’s Labor Code. An employer who violates the new law may be subject to six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.  Additionally, an employer may be on the hook for a plaintiff’s “reasonable attorney’s fees.”

According to the text of AB 51, the law is not “intended to invalidate a written arbitration agreement that is otherwise enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. Sec. 1 et seq.).” Despite this, AB51 is likely to be challenged by employers on exactly this basis.  Last year, a nearly identical bill, AB 3080, was vetoed by California’s previous governor over concerns related to the preemptive effect of the Federal Arbitration Act.

The new law is set to take effect on January 1, 2020 and will apply to all California employment contracts entered into on or after that date.  If AB51 stands, it will be interesting to see whether other states choose to follow California’s lead in banning mandatory arbitration provisions as a condition of employment.  Please check back with Disputing in the future for additional updates on California’s new AB 51 law!

Photo by: Vital Sinkevich on Unsplash

Related Posts

  • A-Rod Files Federal Lawsuit Against MLB and Player’s Union After Arbitrator Upholds Majority of Record 211-Game SuspensionA-Rod Files Federal Lawsuit Against MLB and Player’s Union After Arbitrator Upholds Majority of Record 211-Game Suspension
  • Fifth Circuit Rules on Arbitrator Appointment Process Fifth Circuit Rules on Arbitrator Appointment Process
  • Karl Bayer’s Disputing Has MovedKarl Bayer’s Disputing Has Moved
  • Supreme Court to Hear AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion TodaySupreme Court to Hear AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion Today
  • Disputing Guest Post | Hall Street Meets S. Maestri Place: What Standards of Review will the Fifth Circuit Apply to Arbitration Awards Under FAA Section 10(a)(4) after Citigroup? Disputing Guest Post | Hall Street Meets S. Maestri Place: What Standards of Review will the Fifth Circuit Apply to Arbitration Awards Under FAA Section 10(a)(4) after Citigroup?
  • GUEST-POST | More Interest in Empirical Data Weighing on Case EvaluationsGUEST-POST | More Interest in Empirical Data Weighing on Case Evaluations

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