Federal Court Preserves Use Of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements In California

Fisher Phillips
Contact

Fisher Phillips

A federal judge just extended the reprieve that permitted California employers to escape the grasp of a newly enacted law that aimed to prevent them from utilizing mandatory arbitration agreements with their employees. After granting a temporary restraining order that pressed pause on the new law before it could take effect on January 1, the court today granted a full preliminary injunction that will block the law during the court proceedings that will examine the legality of the new statute. This is good news for California employers, but because things could evolve rapidly over the coming weeks and months, you will want to pay particular attention to upcoming developments to ensure you are in compliance.

Brief Background And Today’s News

As we reported, a coalition of business groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit in December seeking to block AB 51 from ever taking effect. That law, signed into effect in October, would make it unlawful for California employers to require applicants and employees to sign arbitration agreements beginning January 1, 2020.

The plaintiffs asked the court to grant a preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of AB 51 pending proceedings in the lawsuit. They also filed a request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which would halt the law from being enforced while the litigation over the preliminary injunction request was taking place. On December 30, the court granted the TRO, effectively preventing the state from enforcing AB 51 until the request for a preliminary injunction is decided.

Today, the court issued a brief minute order granting the full preliminary injunction and blocking the state from enforcing the law while the litigation is ongoing. “In the coming days,” Judge Kimberly J. Mueller wrote, “the court will explain its reasoning in a detailed, written order.”

At the time the law passed, we predicted that “the law could very well be blocked by a court before it ever takes effect” because “similar recent attempts at restricting arbitration have been struck down as conflicting with a strong federal law favoring it.” We anticipate that, similar to the reasoning that led her to grant the TRO, the judge will conclude that it appears likely that the new law is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.  

Next Steps

Once again, the status quo remains in effect for California employers. It is still lawful to continue requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements. But the litigation surrounding AB 51 could move quickly, so California employers will need to monitor developments closely over the coming weeks and months.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Fisher Phillips | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Fisher Phillips
Contact
more
less

Fisher Phillips on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide