In Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, ruling that an order compelling arbitration...more
California employers can require arbitration of employees’ California Fair Employment and Housing Act and Labor Code claims as a condition of employment, according to a recent circuit court ruling....more
The US Supreme Court has issued its highly anticipated opinion in Viking River Cruises Inc. v. Moriana, on whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California law that invalidates contractual waivers in arbitration...more
Despite the passage of the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act on March 3, arbitration remains a viable option for disputes outside the act’s purview. Several recent and pending legal...more
In a 2-1 decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on September 15 reversed a district court’s order enjoining the enforcement of California Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51) codified as Labor Code Section 432.6. Chamber...more
However, the court found PAGA representative action waivers unenforceable; employers should consider practical implications with respect to arbitration agreements.
On June 23, the California Supreme Court issued its...more
6/30/2014
/ Arbitration ,
Class Action ,
Class Action Arbitration Waivers ,
CLS Transportation ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Iskanian ,
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
Trucking Industry