Archive for arbitration agreements

Federal Court Reinstates Ban on Employment Arbitration Agreements in California – For Now

In 2019, AB 51 is Passed As readers of this blog know, in 2019 the California legislature passed AB 51, a new law that added Section 432.6 to the California Labor Code.  This new statute made it illegal for an employer to require an applicant or employee, as…

Court of Appeals Confirms That Arbitration Agreements Won’t Protect Employers from PAGA Litigation

California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) authorizes aggrieved employees to file lawsuits to recover civil penalties on behalf of themselves, other employees, and the State of California for violations of the California Labor Code.  Lawsuits brought under PAGA have resulted in employers paying millions of dollars in penalties that…

Employers, Beware: Right to Arbitrate can be Waived

Arbitration agreements that are well-drafted and “state-of-the-art” under current California law are key to ensuring that employment disputes will be resolved by final and binding arbitration.  But a recent California Court of Appeal case – Fleming Distribution Co. v. Younan (Cal. Ct. App., May 15, 2020, No. A157038)…

CA Supreme Court Reverses Prior Decision in Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno

On October 17, 2013, the CA Supreme Court overturned its February 2011 decision in Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno (“Sonic I”).  Unfortunately, however, the dense, scholarly, 73-page opinion — known as Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno II (“Sonic II”) — gives little clarity to  California employers trying to craft defensible,…

Arbitration Clause in Employee Handbook Does Not Create an Enforceable Contract

In Sparks v. Vista Del Mar Child Services, the California Court of Appeal held that the mere existence of an arbitration clause in a lengthy employee handbook — without more — does not create a binding, enforceable arbitration agreement between employer and employee. In Sparks, the employer utilized…

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses and Remands California Supreme Court Decision in Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno

As a result of its decision in AT&T Mobility (which I blogged about here), on October 31, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno (which I blogged about here).  Now, as a result, the Sonic Calabasas decision is no longer…

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Landmark Pro-Business Arbitration Ruling

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision in AT&T Mobility LLC. v. Concepcion that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempts state laws that condition the enforceability of an entire class of arbitration agreements on whether or not they allow for classwide arbitration. The issue in the…

Employment Arbitration Agreements After Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno

On February 24, 2011, a divided California Supreme Court ruled in Sonic Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno, S174475, that a worker who signs an otherwise valid pre-employment arbitration agreement does not give up his statutory right to seek administrative relief through Labor Commissioner hearings.  In other words, even…