2
AB 465 – Forced Waivers of Workers' Rights SUMMARY AB 465 will ensure that waivers of important employment rights and procedures arising under California law are made voluntarily and with the consent of the employee. BACKGROUND Forced waivers (including mandatory arbitration) of workplace claims are anathema to our public justice system because they eliminate important procedural guarantees of fairness and due process that are hallmarks of our judicial system. In general, arbitration is an alternative method of resolving disputes in which two parties present their individual sides of a complaint to an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. However, forced waivers or arbitration agreements are fundamentally inferior. Employers often require them as a condition of employment, which means employees will be fired or not hired if they do not give up their rights to resolve employment claims in a court of law. "[T]he economic pressure exerted by employers on all but the most sought-after employees may be particularly acute, for the arbitration agreement stands between the employee and necessary employment." Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. , 24 Cal. 4th 83 (2000). Employers craft the terms of the forced arbitration provisions and typically select the arbitration services providers for the dispute. This creates a "repeat player advantage" that favors employers utilizing the same provider to resolve their employment disputes and disadvantages individual employees who are one-time participants in the process. These clauses are often buried in the fine print of employment applications, employee handbooks and manuals. As a result, it is nearly impossible for an employee to evaluate and make an informed choice about the appropriateness of a resolution mechanism prior to the existence of an actual employment dispute. In 2010, 27 percent of U.S. employers reported that they required arbitration of employment disputes – covering over 36 million employees. This percentage is likely even higher today. Federal preemption under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is strong in this field. However, as recently articulated by the California Supreme Court, "state courts may continue to enforce unconscionability rules that do not interfere with the fundamental attributes of arbitration." Sonic-Calabasas, Inc. v. Moreno (Sonic II) (2013). For More Information, Please Contact Ben Ebbink (916) 319-2091 [email protected]

Updated Fact Sheet

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Legislation to add transparency for mandatory arbitration clauses in California.

Citation preview

  • AB 465 Forced Waivers of Workers' Rights

    SUMMARY

    AB 465 will ensure that waivers of important employment rights and procedures arising under California law are made voluntarily and with the consent of the employee.

    BACKGROUND

    Forced waivers (including mandatory arbitration) ofworkplace claims are anathema to our public justicesystem because they eliminate important proceduralguarantees of fairness and due process that arehallmarks of our judicial system.

    In general, arbitration is an alternative method ofresolving disputes in which two parties present theirindividual sides of a complaint to an arbitrator orpanel of arbitrators.

    However, forced waivers or arbitration agreementsare fundamentally inferior. Employers often requirethem as a condition of employment, which meansemployees will be fired or not hired if they do notgive up their rights to resolve employment claims ina court of law.

    "[T]he economic pressure exerted by employers onall but the most sought-after employees may beparticularly acute, for the arbitration agreementstands between the employee and necessaryemployment." Armendariz v. Foundation HealthPsychcare Services, Inc., 24 Cal. 4th 83 (2000).

    Employers craft the terms of the forcedarbitration provisions and typically select thearbitration services providers for the dispute.This creates a "repeat player advantage" thatfavors employers utilizing the same provider toresolve their employment disputes anddisadvantages individual employees who areone-time participants in the process.

    These clauses are often buried in the fine printof employment applications, employeehandbooks and manuals. As a result, it is nearlyimpossible for an employee to evaluate andmake an informed choice about theappropriateness of a resolution mechanismprior to the existence of an actual employmentdispute.

    In 2010, 27 percent of U.S. employers reportedthat they required arbitration of employmentdisputes covering over 36 million employees.This percentage is likely even higher today.

    Federal preemption under the FederalArbitration Act (FAA) is strong in this field.However, as recently articulated by theCalifornia Supreme Court, "state courts maycontinue to enforce unconscionability rules thatdo not interfere with the fundamental attributesof arbitration." Sonic-Calabasas, Inc. v. Moreno(Sonic II) (2013).

    For More Information, Please Contact Ben Ebbink (916) 319-2091 [email protected]

  • In order to be valid, even under federal law, suchagreements must be voluntary and entered into withthe consent of the employee.

    "Arbitration is favored in this state as a voluntarymeans of resolving disputes, and this voluntarinesshas been its bedrock justification." Armendariz, 24Cal. 4th 83, 115.

    WHAT THIS BILL WILL DO

    AB 465 ensures these agreements are entered into with the consent of the employee by requiring that such waivers be knowing, voluntary and in writing. Such waivers shall also not expressly be made as a condition of employment.

    Specifically, this bill does the following:

    It ensures that these agreements will not be required as a condition of employment.

    It prohibits an employer from discriminatingor retaliating against an employee who refuses to sign such an agreement.

    It ensures that such agreements are knowing, voluntary, and in writing.

    It provides that the party that seeks to enforce such an agreement has the burden of proving that such agreements were voluntary and not made as a condition of employment.

    SUPPORT

    California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO (sponsor)American Civil Liberties Union of CAAmerican Federation of State, County and Municipal EmployeesCA Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit UnionCA Conference of MachinistsCalifornia Employment Lawyers AssociationCalifornia Immigrant Policy CenterCalifornia Nurses AssociationCalifornia Professional FirefightersCalifornia Rural Legal Assistance FoundationCalifornia School Employees AssociationCalifornia State Firefighters' Association

    California Teamsters Public Affairs CouncilCLEAN Carwash CampaignCongress of California SeniorsConsumer Attorneys of CaliforniaConsumer Federation of CaliforniaConsumers for Auto Reliability and SafetyEngineers and Scientists of CA, IFPTE Local 20Equal Rights AdvocatesInternational Longshore and Warehouse UnionKoreatown Immigrant Workers AllianceMaintenance Cooperation Trust FundProfessional and Technical Engineers, IFPTE Local 21Service Employees International Union, CaliforniaUNITE-HEREUtility Workers Union of America

    STATUS

    Assembly Labor 5-2Assembly Floor 45-30

    For More Information, Please Contact Ben Ebbink (916) 319-2091 [email protected]

    SUMMARYBACKGROUNDWHAT THIS BILL WILL DO