The Supreme Court just decided a case which could have a massive impact on workers across the country. In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, the Supreme Court found that employees can waive their right to litigate their discrimination or wage theft cases in federal court by signing an arbitration agreement with their employer. In the past, the Court had held that federal protection from discrimination could not be limited by a contract such as an arbitration agreement, but this decision changes that. Now, by signing an employer's arbitration agreement, you will no longer be able to bring any federal discrimination or overtime claim against your employer to court. Additionally, your employer can forbid you from joining any class or collective action lawsuit through such an arbitration agreement.
This is a devastating blow to workers. When an employer gives their employees an arbitration agreement to sign, they have all the negotiating power and can threaten their employees with termination if they fail to sign the agreement while the employees have little recourse. Now more than ever, employees should consider organizing a union at their workplace to help protect them from employers abusing their power to discriminate and/or steal your wages.
If you have any questions or your employer is requiring you to sign an arbitration agreement, you can contact the Hurm Law Firm, LLC for a free consultation.
In February of 2018, the United States Supreme Court considered a case which could have nation-wide repercussions for workers and their families. The matter is Janus v. American Federation of State, Municipal, and County Employees and the central issue is whether employees are required to pay for the services unions provide or if unions will be required to work for free.
When a union is formed, individual employees may chose whether or not to pay membership dues and join the union. The union, on the other hand, is required to work on behalf of all, regardless of if they paid membership dues. If employees chose not to pay it membership dues to the union, the union still had to work on their behalf. This intolerable situation was resolved in a case called Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, where the United States Supreme Court permitted unions to charge an "agency fee" to individuals who chose not to be members of the union. This fee covers bargaining and representational costs, but not political activity or lobbying. This decision balanced individual employees' right not to fund speech that they do not like, without forcing unions to work for free.
Business interests, ironically, believe unions should be forced to work for free (although they would never tolerate being forced to work for free themselves). They see this as an opportunity to finally defeat the middle classes' last bulwark; labor unions. They have created organizations that fund lawsuits challenging the Supreme Court's Abood decision. Janus is just such a case and challenges the constitutionality of the "agency fee." Should they succeed, unions will be forced to work for free and several will cease to exist.
Unions need to be prepared for this decision and plan accordingly. The Hurm Law Firm can guide you through the legal uncertainty left in Janus' wake.
Matthew T. Hurm, Esq.
Matthew T. Hurm, Esq. has represented employees, their unions, and fringe benefit funds since 2010. He has been named a Rising Star by Super Lawyers magazine in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021. He works primarily on labor and employment, workers' compensation, pension and healthcare, and estate planning legal matters. Matt serves as a contributing editor to the leading labor law treatise, The Developing Labor Law and other significant legal references. He graduated cum laude from the University of Minnesota Law School and has resided in Cleveland for seven years.