martindale.com
Legal Library
|
Controversal NLRB Decision: Waivers Requiring Individual Pursuit of Claims Violate NLRA by Emily J. Bordens
Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation - New York Office
Michael T. Hensley
Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation - Florham Park Office
Dennis Kadian
Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation - New York Office
Andrée Peart Laney
Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation - Florham Park Office
Jed L. Marcus
Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation - New York Office
Tracey Salmon-Smith
Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation - Florham Park Office
|
|
February 7, 2012
Previously published on February 2012
The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) recently held in D.R. Horton, Inc. and Michael Cuda, Case 12-CA-25764 (January 3, 2012), that class action waivers which preclude employees from pursuing any relief other than individual claims are unenforceable and violate the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA” or “Act”). A case of first impression for the Board, the decision defies precedent, which generally holds such waivers in employment agreements to be enforceable. As such, this decision may foreshadow costly legal challenges for nonunionized employers from employees seeking to invalidate mandatory arbitration agreements that limit employees to individual claims. It definitely raises important questions underlying the class waiver debate: Do employees have a “substantive right” to pursue collective litigation? Are class action waivers now obsolete?
|
The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. |
| | View More Library Documents By... | | | |
| | | | Bressler, Amery & Ross A Professional Corporation Overview |
Practice Area Resource Centers
|
|