Eighth Circuit Rules That NLRB Erred By Invalidating Employment Contracts Requiring Individual Arbitration
We formerly reported on the federal circuit split which has developed within the enforceability of arbitration provisions waiving class actions in employment contracts. Compare December 19, 2013 (D. R. Horton) and November 9, 2015 (Murphy Oil) with June 6, 2016 (Lewis). The Eighth Circuit lately prepared its position along the side of holding that such class waivers are enforceable. Particularly, the Eighth Circuit examined if the NLRB erred by discovering that an important individual arbitration clause within an employment agreement violated sections 7 and eight(a)(1) from the National Labor Relations Act by (1) requiring the worker to arbitrate “[a]ll claims, disputes, or controversies” associated with employment (2) waiving the employee’s to conserve a class action lawsuit and (3) allegedly leading employees to think that they couldn’t file a grievance using the National Labor Relations Board.
Carrying out a prior ruling from the Eighth Circuit in addition to rulings through the Fifth Circuit in D.R. Horton and Murphy Oil, a legal court held the employer “did not violate section 8(a)(1) by requiring its employees to initiate an arbitration agreement that incorporated a waiver of sophistication or collective actions in most forums to solve employment-related disputes.” A Legal Court did find, however, that NLRB correctly ruled the language from the arbitration clause, which incorporated an extensive requirement that “[a]ll claims, disputes, or controversies arising from, or perhaps in relation to” employment with the organization “shall be made the decision by arbitration,” was excessively broad and really should have contained language informing the worker they retained the legal rights to file for charges using the NLRB. Cellular Sales of Missouri, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board, No. 15-1620 (eighth Cir. June 2, 2016).