On July 1, 2011, in Jock v. Sterling Jewelers Inc.,1 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that an arbitrator did not exceed her authority in ruling that an employment arbitration agreement that was silent on the issue of class proceedings permitted the plaintiffs to pursue their claims in a class arbitration. The decision reversed a district court order that the arbitrator had exceeded her authority, in light of Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp.2 Jock has rekindled the debate over whether arbitrators can interpret silence in an arbitration agreement as a basis for classwide arbitration, as well as whether class action preclusion clauses are enforceable in all statutory contexts.3
Procedural Background
Plaintiffs in Jock included current and former retail sales employees of Sterling Jewelers Inc., who contended that Sterling’s discriminatory promotion and compensation policies both denied promotional opportunities to qualified female employees and paid female employees less than similarly situated male employees. Each employee signed an employment agreement with Sterling containing an arbitration clause, which provided, in pertinent part:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
