President Joe Biden is expected to sign the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021.
Once signed into law, the bipartisan legislation will invalidate existing forced arbitration provisions and provide employees who complain of workplace sexual harassment and sexual assault the choice of pursuing their claims in court rather than private arbitration. The law also invalidates joint-action waivers, which prohibit individuals to the agreement from participating in joint, class or collective actions.
Specifically, the act targets pre-dispute arbitration provisions, which historically have been utilized by employers in contracts to resolve disputes related to employment matters. The legislation does not preclude parties from agreeing to arbitrate a dispute regarding sexual harassment or sexual assault once it arises.
Proponents of arbitration provisions favor controlling the forum, streamlining litigation and relying on experienced arbitrators to resolve issues. Critics of such provisions cite financial imbalance between workers and employers and complain that bad actors are able to shield allegations from becoming part of the public record.
While the law is a win for workers, the scope of the new legislation is limited only to disputes involving claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Employers will retain the ability to require pre-arbitration provisions for other disputes arising out of the business relationship, such as compensation or termination.
If you have any questions regarding the impact of this legislation on existing agreements, or you would like a review of your policies and handbooks, please contact any of the members of Plunkett Cooney’s Labor & Employment Practice Group today.
- Senior Attorney
John S. Gilliam is a senior attorney in the firm's Labor and Employment Law Practice Group who focuses his practice primarily in the area of employment law, including litigation involving alleged discrimination, retaliation and ...
Add a comment
Subscribe
RSSTopics
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Wage & Hour
- Human Resources
- Employment Agreement
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Employment Discrimination
- Minimum Wage
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- COVID-19
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Coronavirus
- Unemployment Benefits
- Public Education
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Regulatory Law
- OSHA Issues
- National Labor Relations Act
- At Will Employment
- Title VII
- Retaliation
- Sick Leave
- Contracts
- Workplace Harassment
- National Labor Relations Board
- Hostile Work Environment
- Business Risk Management
- Noncompete Agreements
- Transgender Issues
- ERISA
- Department of Justice
- Workers' Compensation
- Medicare Issues
- Cannabis
- LGBTQ
- Class Actions
- Sexual Harassment
- Garnishments
- Civil Rights
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- RICO
- Emergency Information
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Tax Law
- Title IX
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- Diversity
- Union Organizing & Relations
Recent Updates
- Unanimous Supreme Court Finds Lip Service not Good Enough for Disabled Student
- Michigan Senate Votes to Repeal 2012 Right-to-Work Law
- Michigan Appellate Court Overturns Decision on Minimum Wage, Paid Sick Leave Requirements
- Michigan Supreme Court Ruling Could Result in High Exposure Claims Against Employers
- FTC Proposes Ban on All Employer Noncompete Agreements
- Court Delays Ruling on Fate of Michigan’s Paid Sick Leave, Minimum Wage Laws Until February 2023
- Michigan Supreme Court Affirms State’s Civil Right Law Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation
- DOJ Issues Guidance on ADA, Opioid Crisis Issues
- Congress Passes Law, With Retroactive Effect, to Invalidate Forced Arbitration Provisions at the Employee’s Election
- U.S. Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks Implementation of Vaccine Requirement for Large Businesses