Header graphic for print
California Employment Law Blog

Category Archives: FAA

Subscribe to FAA RSS Feed

Court Holds Arbitration Agreement Requiring Employee to Pay Half of Arbitration Costs is Unconscionable

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, FAA

In Chavarria v. Ralphs Grocery Co., No. 11-56673, 2013 WL 5779332 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2013), the plaintiff, a former deli clerk, brought a class action against Ralphs for various alleged wage and hour violations of the California Labor Code.  As a condition of employment, Chavarria signed an arbitration agreement containing a class action waiver. … Continue Reading

Right To Compel Arbitration Agreement Not Waived If Plaintiff Suffered No Prejudice From Delay

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, FAA

In a post last week, we noted a recent trend of federal courts strongly enforcing employment arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). That trend continues in Richards v. Ernst & Young, LLP, Case No. 11-17530 (9th Cir. Aug. 21, 2013), which holds that a defendant’s pretrial participation in litigation does not, absent prejudice… Continue Reading

Second Circuit Reaffirms Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements Containing Collective Action Waivers In Two FLSA Cases

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, Class Actions, Employment Contracts, FAA, FLSA, Wage and Hour

Two recent decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit have reaffirmed the enforceability of employment-related arbitration agreements containing class action waivers. In Sutherland v. Ernst & Young and Raniere v. Citigroup, Inc. the Second Circuit held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires courts to enforce a valid agreement to arbitrate… Continue Reading

California Court Criticizes Prior Case Law Invalidating Class Action Waivers, Then Punts To State Supreme Court

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, Class Actions, FAA

Truly Nolen of America v. Superior Court, 2012 WL 3222211 (Aug. 13, 2012) California law involving classwide wage-and-hour arbitration continues to evolve in the aftermath of the United States Supreme Court’s landmark decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011), which generally prohibits states from requiring additional due process guarantees (not… Continue Reading

California Court Approves Class Action Waivers In Employment Arbitration Agreements

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, Class Actions, FAA, Wage and Hour

The plaintiff in Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, brought a putative class action and a representative action under California’s Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) for various wage and hour violations. During his employment, Iskanian agreed that he would not assert class action or representative action claims against his employer and, instead, agreed to submit… Continue Reading

State Limitations On Arbitration Agreements Are Preempted By Federal Law

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, Class Actions, Employment Law Notes, FAA, Supreme Court

AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011) In this landmark new opinion, the United States Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) prohibits states from conditioning the enforceability of an arbitration agreement on the availability of class action arbitration procedures. Although this case arose in the consumer context (it involved AT&T’s… Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court Tips the Scales Back Toward Arbitration

Posted in Arbitration Agreements, Class Actions, FAA, Supreme Court

In a ruling that has garnered significant interest among employers, the U.S. Supreme Court held on Wednesday that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Supreme Court’s efforts to impose heightened unconscionability standards on class action waivers in consumer arbitration agreements. This decision may also sound the death knell for similar restrictions imposed by California… Continue Reading

Employee’s $400,000 Jury Verdict Against Urine- Testing Lab Is Upheld

Posted in Drug Policies, Employment Law Notes, FAA, Wrongful Termination

Ishikawa v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 343 F.3d 1129 (9th Cir. 2003) Yasuko Ishikawa, a Delta Airlines flight attendant, was terminated for failing a drug-detection urine test. Because the test had been performed negligently and had no validity, Delta rehired Ishikawa and paid her her lost income. Ishikawa also sued LabOne, the urine-testing laboratory, for negligence,… Continue Reading