• 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 Yet Again Rules Class Arbitration Waivers in Employment Contracts are Invalid

0
by Beth Graham

Wednesday, Nov 18, 2015


Tweet

The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) has yet again ruled that a class arbitration waiver included in an employment contract violates the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). In Amex Card Service Co., No. 28–CA–123865 (Nov. 10, 2015), Amex required its workers to agree to submit any claims against the company to binding arbitration as a condition of employment. The arbitral clause also prohibited collective arbitration and stated each worker must engage in arbitration proceedings in his or her individual capacity.

In March 2014, three Amex employees submitted a charge to the NLRB alleging the company violated the NLRA by forcing workers to engage in arbitration of wage and hour claims in Arizona. A three-member NLRB panel found that Amex engaged in unfair labor practices by enforcing the mandatory arbitration clause.

According to the NLRB:

Here, we find that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) by maintaining and enforcing the Policy and the Form (collectively, the Respondent’s arbitration policy). First, we find that the Respondent’s arbitration policy is facially unlawful under D. R. Horton and Murphy Oil, supra. Like the policies in those cases, the Respondent’s arbitration policy requires employees, as a condition of their employment, to submit their employment-related legal claims to individual arbitration, thereby compelling employees to waive their Section 7 right to pursue such claims through class or collective action in all forums, arbitral and judicial. See Murphy Oil, 361 NLRB No. 72, slip op. at 1; D. R. Horton, 357 NLRB No. 184, slip op. at 1.

Second, we find that the Respondent’s arbitration policy is also unlawful because employees would reasonably believe that it waived or limited their right to file a charge with the Board or to access the Board’s processes. Although the Policy states that “[a]ny claim under the National Labor Relations Act” is not covered, and that the Policy “does not preclude an individual from filing a claim or a charge with a governmental administrative agency . . . such as the National Labor Relations Board,” the Form contains no such exceptions. When the Policy and the Form are read together, it is at best ambiguous whether employees retain the right to file a charge with the Board or to access the Board’s processes. “[A]ny ambiguity in the rule must be construed against the Respondent as the promulgator of the rule.” Lafayette Park Hotel, 326 NLRB 824, 828 (1998), enfd. 203 F.3d 52 D.C. Cir. 1999). Moreover, the Form is drafted as a complete agreement to be signed by the employee; in it, the employee acknowledges receipt of the Policy, but it does not incorporate the Policy in its operative language, which expressly covers “all employment-related disputes,” without limitation. Therefore, the Respondent’s arbitration policy also violates Section 8(a)(1) because employees would reasonably believe that it interferes with their ability to file a Board charge or to access the Board’s processes. See U-Haul Co. of California, 347 NLRB at 377–378.

Third, because we find that the Respondent’s arbitration policy is unlawful, we also find that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) by enforcing the arbitration policy through its motion to compel individual arbitration in the cause of action brought by the Charging Parties and two other former employees in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. See Murphy Oil, 361 NLRB No. 72, slip op. at 19.

Although the NLRB’s decision in the Amex case is not subject to review by the Fifth Circuit, the appellate court adhered to its 2013 decision in D.R. Horton, Inc. and overturned the Board’s ruling in Murphy Oil on October 26th. (You can read more about that case in a prior Disputing blog post.) Given the Board’s clear lack of regard for the Fifth Circuit’s holdings, it would appear that the NLRB is hoping to create a circuit split on the issue of class arbitration waivers in employment disputes.

Photo credit: Chris Halderman / Foter.com / CC BY-ND

Related Posts

  • 5th Circuit Once Again Upholds Class Waiver Absent an Arbitration Agreement5th Circuit Once Again Upholds Class Waiver Absent an Arbitration Agreement
  • In Apparent Showdown, NLRB Continues to Hold Class Arbitration Waivers in Employment Contracts InvalidIn Apparent Showdown, NLRB Continues to Hold Class Arbitration Waivers in Employment Contracts Invalid
  • Fifth Circuit Refuses to Reconsider D.R. Horton v. NLRB DecisionFifth Circuit Refuses to Reconsider D.R. Horton v. NLRB Decision
  • U.S. Supreme Court Sides With Employers Over Class Arbitration WaiversU.S. Supreme Court Sides With Employers Over Class Arbitration Waivers
  • 5th Circuit Upholds Class Waiver Without an Arbitration Agreement5th Circuit Upholds Class Waiver Without an Arbitration Agreement
  • DOJ Flips on Class Waivers IssueDOJ Flips on Class Waivers Issue

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