Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

EMPLOYERS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REQUIRE MANDATORY ARBITRATION OF LEGAL CLAIMS BY TRANSPORTATION WORKERS

Written on .

The Federal Arbitration Act is a federal law that encourages the arbitration of legal claims.  Fifty-five percent of American workers are covered by mandatory arbitration provisions in their employment contracts with their employers, according to published reports.  Many of these mandatory arbitration provisions preclude an employee from bringing a class or collective action and require all legal claims to be brought individually in arbitration rather than in court.  The arbitration process is quicker and cheaper than court litigation, and prevents "runaway" juries.

The current case involves whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) can apply to transportation workers, as there is an exclusion in the FAA for "contracts of employment" of certain transportation workers.  In a January ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court, the issue was whether this exclusion applied to workers who were independent contractors so that the exclusion for "contracts of employment" referred only to contracts that established an employer-employee relationship, and not to contracts with independent contractors.  New Prime, Inc. v. Oliveira, No. 17-340 (U.S., 1/15/19).

The Supreme Court ruled that when Congress enacted the FAA in 1925, the term "contracts of employment" referred to agreements to perform work, whether to be performed by employees or independent contractors.  Thus, under the exclusion from the FAA of certain transportation workers, the Court lacked authority under the FAA to order arbitration. 

Editor's Note: The New Prime Supreme Court ruling does not affect employers of employees or independent contractors other than certain transportation workers in interstate commerce.  However, trucking companies and related transportation employers will have to find other ways besides the FAA to enforce mandatory arbitration agreements.  Most states have state arbitration laws that may be applicable, although a few states exempt arbitration agreements in employment contracts.  Thus, employers of transportation workers have to rely on state arbitration laws to enforce their mandatory arbitration agreements.  Some have expressed the view that other theories might be used to counter mandatory arbitration agreements of transportation workers in interstate commerce.

Related Content

Get Email Updates

Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.

Recent Content

gavel

Judge Invalidates Joint Employer Rule, and Independent Contractor Rule Takes Effect

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Joint Employer Regulation, which was set to take effect March 11, 2024, was invalidated by a Te...
balance of justice statue

The Importance of Fairness in Employment to the Law and to Job Satisfaction

Some of you may have heard about disgruntled employees taping phone conversations of their discharge and mentioning them on social media ...
we the people, focus, document

Major Employers Challenge Constitutionality of Labor Act

Amazon is the most recent major employer to challenge the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRB), joining Trader Jo...
starbucks drink on a table

Starbucks' Big Change in Labor Policies

Starbucks' new public commitment to work with its union antagonists to resolve issues has been called a landmark in labor relations.  In ...
smiling blocks

Judge Orders Survey Data to Be Revealed from Employer EEO-1 Reports

Employers are supposed to file annually the EEO-1, Standard Form 100, with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL).  This requirement applies ...
mcdonalds sign, blue sky

Featured Article at The Federalist Society: Franchise With That? McDonald’s No-Poach Agreements Receive Antitrust Scrutiny

Elizabeth K. Dorminey authored another article for the Federalist Society. Here's a quick summary of what this article, Franchise With ...