Editorial: After Supreme Court decision, Congress must preserve workers’ right to sue

Los Angeles Times May 22, 2018

A divided Supreme Court undercut American workers on Monday, ruling that employers can bar employees from bringing class-action lawsuits over wage and workplace disputes.

The court held in Epic Systems Corp. vs. Lewis that the right to collective actions guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act does not bar employers from requiring disputes to be resolved individually through arbitration, as provided by the Federal Arbitration Act.

“As a matter of policy these questions are surely debatable,” Justice Neil M. Gorsuch wrote for the majority. “But as a matter of law the answer is clear.”

Whether the court’s decision is sound law is an argument for those versed in the fine details of statute and precedent. But mandatory arbitration is bad policy, and bad for workers.

Congress should step in restore workers’ ability to seek redress in the courts – either individually or as a group – rather than let bosses bar the door to the courthouse.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, some 60 million nonunionized private-sector employees work under agreements that preclude them from suing their employers over workplace disputes.

Arbitration can be a useful way of resolving a conflict without the expense and time investment of going through the courts.

But arbitration agreements are fair only if the two sides entering into them do so willingly and on equal footing.

If employers routinely force applicants to sign away the right to sue in order to get hired, then the two sides are clearly not entering arbitration willingly or as equals.

And studies have found that workers win arbitration cases at lower rates than they do court cases.

(Read More)

Ninth Circuit Upends Idaho’s Anti-Union Law

Wednesday, September 16, 2015

By MIKE HEUER
(CN) – Since federal labor law controls what workers do with their pay, Idaho cannot block union contractors from using portions of wages as a subsidy to better compete for work, the Ninth Circuit ruled Wednesday.

Construction unions developed the strategy, known as “job-targeting” or “market-recovery” programs, as the percentage of workers they represent continued to decline.

The program involve unions collects funds from workers it represents and using those funds to subsidize bids by union contractors, “allowing the contractors to lower their labor costs and so more effectively compete with non-union contractors,” a ruling from the Ninth Circuit says today.

When Idaho banned the practice with a law called the Fairness in Contracting Act, unions filed suit for an injunction.

Before the law could take effect in 2011, Chief U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill ruled that the law conflicts with Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

An appellate panel with the Ninth Circuit in Portland, Ore., affirmed today.

In addition to private jobs, Idaho’s law would apply to federal contractor jobs that are governed by the Davis-Bacon Act, a federal statute that determines labor and pay standards on federal projects.

(Read More)