Seyfarth Synopsis. As of January 1, 2020, AB 51 makes it unlawful for employers to impose arbitration agreements on employees as a condition of employment, even if employees are permitted to opt out. But will AB 51 withstand...more
12/18/2019
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Conditional Job Offers ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
FEHA ,
Labor Code ,
Labor Regulations ,
Preemption ,
State and Local Government ,
State Labor Laws
Seyfarth Synopsis: California courts are often hostile towards defendants that seek to require litigious employees to honor their arbitration agreements. The defendant’s plight might seem more stark still if the defendant has...more
On October 11—his very last day to sign or veto bills—Governor Brown vetoed the much-feared Assembly Bill 465. AB 465 would have banned mandatory agreements to arbitrate Labor Code claims as a condition of employment. At...more
10/22/2015
/ Arbitration ,
AT&T Mobility v Concepcion ,
Employment Contract ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Governor Brown ,
Governor Vetoes ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Mandatory Arbitration ,
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses ,
Preemption ,
SCOTUS
On August 31, the California Legislature passed AB 465, aiming to “ensure that a contract to waive any of the rights, penalties, remedies, forums, or procedures under the Labor Code”—such as an arbitration agreement—is “a...more