• 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


Executive Order Prohibits Mandatory Arbitration of Federal Employment Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Claims

0
by Beth Graham

Thursday, Aug 07, 2014


Tweet

On July 31st, President Obama signed the “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order.  As part of the order, federal contractors are now forbidden from using mandatory pre-employment arbitration clauses for employment disputes related to sexual assault, harassment, or workplace discrimination violations.

Here is the relevant provision:

Sec. 6.  Complaint and Dispute Transparency.  (a)  Agencies shall ensure that for all contracts where the estimated value of the supplies acquired and services required exceeds $1 million, provisions in solicitations and clauses in contracts shall provide that contractors agree that the decision to arbitrate claims arising under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of sexual assault or harassment may only be made with the voluntary consent of employees or independent contractors after such disputes arise.  Agencies shall also require that contractors incorporate this  same requirement into subcontracts where the estimated value of the supplies acquired and services required exceeds $1 million.

(b) Subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to contracts or subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial items or commercially available off-the-shelf items.

(c) A contractor’s or subcontractor’s agreement under subsection (a) of this section to arbitrate certain claims only with the voluntary post-dispute consent of employees or independent contractors shall not apply with respect to:

(i) employees who are covered by any type of collective bargaining agreement negotiated between the contractor and a labor organization representing them; or

(ii) employees or independent contractors who entered into a valid contract to arbitrate prior to the contractor or subcontractor bidding on a contract covered by this order, except that a contractor’s or subcontractor’s agreement under subsection (a) of this section to arbitrate certain claims only with the voluntary post-dispute consent of employees or independent contractors shall apply if the contractor or subcontractor is permitted to change the terms of the contract with the employee or independent contractor, or when the contract is renegotiated or replaced.

According to a White House Office of the Press Secretary Fact Sheet, the provision was designed to:

6. Give Employees a Day in Court: The Executive Order directs companies with federal contracts of $1  million or more not to require their employees to enter into predispute arbitration agreements for disputes arising out of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act or from torts related to sexual assault or harassment (except when valid contracts already exist).  This builds on a policy already passed by Congress and successfully implemented at the Department of Defense, the largest federal contracting agency, and will help improve contractors’ compliance with labor laws.

This provision of the Executive Order has reportedly sparked fierce debate over whether or not it exceeds the President’s authority.  A June 2011 Congressional Research Service Report entitled “Presidential Authority to Impose Requirements on Federal Contractors” suggests this particular provision may soon face a legal challenge.

Disputing would like to thank Mark Kantor for alerting us to this developing issue.  Please stay tuned for more on this fascinating topic in the future!

Photo credit: cletch / Foter / Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

Related Posts

  • Executive Order Restricts Mandatory Arbitration of Title VII Claims for Some Federal ContractorsExecutive Order Restricts Mandatory Arbitration of Title VII Claims for Some Federal Contractors
  • DC Court Refuses to Seal Petition to Confirm Arbitration AwardDC Court Refuses to Seal Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award
  • Senate Narrowly Votes to Rescind New CFPB Arbitration RuleSenate Narrowly Votes to Rescind New CFPB Arbitration Rule
  • New Treasury Department Report Recommends SEC Allow Shareholder ArbitrationNew Treasury Department Report Recommends SEC Allow Shareholder Arbitration
  • Lawsuit Seeks to Halt CPFB Rule Against Mandatory Arbitration Agreements that Ban Class-ActionsLawsuit Seeks to Halt CPFB Rule Against Mandatory Arbitration Agreements that Ban Class-Actions
  • U.S. Dept. of Ed. Reconsidering Regulation Banning Pre-Dispute Arbitration Agreements in Higher EducationU.S. Dept. of Ed. Reconsidering Regulation Banning Pre-Dispute Arbitration Agreements in Higher Education

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