Philippe Selendy and Faith Gay of Selendy & Gay, in New York City. (Photo by David Handschuh/ALM)

Selendy & Gay is the latest law firm to stop requiring attorneys to sign mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition of employment, building on a campaign to end the practice that emerged in the wake of the #MeToo movement.

The move by the law firm—a 40-lawyer litigation boutique that spun off from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan in early 2018—was first announced Thursday by the People's Parity Project, an organization of law school students that aims to end discrimination and harassment in the legal industry.

Selendy & Gay, which was founded by prominent Quinn Emanuel partners Philippe Selendy and Faith Gay and is majority women-owned, will no longer require attorneys or any other employees to sign forced arbitration clauses upon employment, the firm confirmed in a statement.

"After looking deeply into the issue, we decided to eliminate mandatory arbitration agreements because it is an important issue to our employees and prospective hires, and we determined that doing so is in the best interests of our firm," said David Elsberg, Selendy & Gay's co-managing partner.

The firm declined to comment further. Partners at Selendy & Gay were themselves recently forced into arbitration in a battle with Quinn Emanuel over client fees.

Mandatory arbitration policies generally require employees to waive their right to sue or participate in class action lawsuits, and instead agree to resolve any employment disputes through confidential arbitration.

The People's Parity Project and other critics say the clauses are unfair to workers and can allow large law firms to conceal accusations of racism, sexual harassment and assault. Defenders of mandatory arbitration have argued that the policies can be beneficial to young attorneys who may not want litigation tied to their names to remain public and potentially hamper their careers.

According to Yale Law Women's 2019 report on gender equity at Big Law firms, of firms that disclosed their mandatory arbitration policies, 10.6% require junior and senior associates to sign a mandatory arbitration contract, and 30.2% require their equity partners to do the same. Yale Law women, which is a student affinity group at Yale Law School, opposed mandatory arbitration policies.

Among firms maintaining their mandatory arbitration policies are DLA Piper, Venable, Cooley and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, according to People's Parity Project. The organization has targeted these firms and others, encouraging law students seeking summer associate positions and early career employment opportunities to refrain from interviewing with firms that uphold mandatory arbitration policies.

The pressure is having some effect: After law students boycotted Kirkland & Ellis in 2018 over its mandatory arbitration clause, the firm announced it was ending the policy for nonattorneys, associates and summer associates. Kirkland has since dropped its mandatory arbitration clause for all employees, according to People's Parity Project.

Sidley Austin and McDermott Will & Emery have also ended their mandatory arbitration requirements for employees, while other firms have ended the policy for some employees: Rutan & Tucker and Edelson no longer requires mandatory arbitration for associates.

The increased focus on transparency and corporate responsibility sparked by the #MeToo movement may be changing law firms' behavior in other ways as well. For example, some firms that traditionally might have kept misconduct allegations as private as possible have instead shifted to a more public approach: In the past year both Mayer Brown and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe proactively notified press about attorneys departing the firm for inappropriate personal conduct.