• 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


SCOTUS Rejects Amazon’s Petition in “Last Mile” Delivery Driver Arbitration Dispute

0
by Beth Graham

Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021


Tweet

The Supreme Court of the United States has declined to consider whether “final mile” delivery drivers are transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce and exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”).  In Amazon.com, Inc. vs. Rittmann, (No. 20-622) an Amazon delivery driver, Rittman, filed a putative class-action Fair Labor Standards Act lawsuit on behalf of thousands of Amazon delivery drivers.  In response, Amazon moved to resolve the dispute via individual arbitration pursuant to the collective action waiver and binding arbitration agreement each driver agreed to prior to working with the company.

The FAA does not apply “to contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.”  According to the Ninth Circuit, the Amazon delivery drivers qualified for the FAA exemption because they completed the final leg of deliveries that cross state borders.  As a result, the Court of Appeals held the lawsuit may proceed in court.

In November, Amazon filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court.  The question presented in the case stated:

Congress extended the Federal Arbitration Act’s strong support for arbitration to the full reach of its powers to regulate foreign and interstate commerce, with a limited exception for “contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.” 9 U.S.C. 1 (emphasis added). Recognizing that Congress included this exemption to preserve specialized arbitration regimes for seamen and railroad employees, the Court has held that the exemption requires “a narrow construction.” Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 532 U.S. 105, 118 (2001).

In a divided decision, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Amazon Flex drivers who use their personal vehicles to make local deliveries in a single state are exempt interstate workers because Amazon sells goods that travel in interstate commerce before Flex drivers pick them up for delivery.

The question presented is whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s exemption for classes of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce prevents the Act’s application to local transportation workers who, as a class, are not engaged to transport goods or passengers across state or national boundaries. Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied Amazon’s petition without comment.  This has effectively given the drivers a green light to proceed with their class-action lawsuit.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied Amazon’s petition without comment.  This has effectively given the drivers a green light to proceed with a class-action lawsuit in court.

In July, the First Circuit Court of Appeals issued a similar decision, which Amazon has also asked the Supreme Court to review (No. 20-1077).  The nation’s high court has not yet decided whether to grant Amazon’s petition, but based on yesterday’s order it will likely be denied.  You may read more about that case in another Disputing blog post.

Photo by: Super Straho on Unsplash

Related Posts

  • Employment and Consumer Arbitration: NPR ArticleEmployment and Consumer Arbitration: NPR Article
  • Martha Stewart Living Ordered to Mediate Dispute With Macy’s and J.C. PenneyMartha Stewart Living Ordered to Mediate Dispute With Macy’s and J.C. Penney
  • Fifth Circuit Interprets the Meaning of a Reasoned Arbitral Award Fifth Circuit Interprets the Meaning of a Reasoned Arbitral Award
  • Resident Communication Improves After Formal TrainingResident Communication Improves After Formal Training
  • Federal Judge Comments on “Why Isn’t ADR More Popular?”  Federal Judge Comments on “Why Isn’t ADR More Popular?”
  • Comments to Dan Solin’s Post on Arbitration of Securities Disputes at FINRA  Comments to Dan Solin’s Post on Arbitration of Securities Disputes at FINRA

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