On April 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court--in the case of AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion --held that California law couldn't invalidate arbitration provisions in consumer contracts, even when those agreements effectively barred class actions by requiring claims to be arbitrated on an individual basis.
After that decision, business groups throughout the country were eager to know whether the same theory would apply to employment agreements.
Hear this. In January of this year, the National Labor Relations Board, in the case of In re D.R. Horton and Michael Cuda , found that arbitration clauses which prohibit employees from pursuing class or collective actions violated federal law--Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.
While opponents question whether the NLRB's decision can be reconciled with that of our nation's highest court, class action lawyers are touting D.R. Horton as a victory for employee rights ... at least for now.
Watch out for that Beezlenut oil!
To view a copy of the National Labor Relations Board's decision, please use this link: In re D.R. Horton and Michael Cuda
To view a copy of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision, please use this link: AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion
# # #
Inquiries about these cases may be directed to Jeffrey M. Norton at: