Governor Signs Bill Banning Forced Arbitration for Employees
Assembly Bill 51 blocks employers from requiring workers to pursue their claims privately as a condition of accepting a job or continuing employment.
October 11, 2019 at 12:34 AM
3 minute read
Gov. Gavin Newsom late Thursday signed legislation outlawing mandatory workplace arbitration agreements, thrilling labor advocates and the plaintiff's bar and inviting a certain lawsuit from business groups.
Assembly Bill 51 does not bar employment-based arbitration outright. It does block employers from requiring workers to settle their claims privately as a condition of accepting a job or continuing employment.
"When both parties choose arbitration freely, it can be a highly effective tool," the bill's author, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, said in a statement. "But it doesn't work when corporations say you won't be hired unless you sign away your rights."
By signing AB 51, Newsom has signaled a new receptiveness in the governor's office to arbitration restrictions.
Legislative Democrats have seen their efforts to curb the use of mandatory arbitration blocked in recent years by intense lobbying from the California Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, as well as opposition from Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown. The former governor vetoed legislation similar to AB 51 last year, saying the bill "plainly violates federal law."
Jennifer Siebel Newsom, Gov. Newsom's wife, lobbied for last year's arbitration bill, which was framed as an effort to stop companies from shielding sexual harassment claims from public light. Siebel Newsom did not publicly campaign for this year's measure.
A spokeswoman for the state Chamber of Commerce, which argued the legislation is federally preempted, declined to comment Thursday night.
The new law will only apply to employment contracts entered into or modified after Jan. 1, 2020.
Newsom on Thursday signed a number of other workplace-related bills closely watched by employment lawyers:
Workplace claims deadline extended. Assembly Bill 9 gives employees three years instead of one to file claims of illegal employment practices with the state. The bill's author, Assemblywoman Eloise Gómez Reyes, D-San Bernardino, argued that the current one-year time limit is too short for victims who do not understand their rights or fear retaliation. The bill was sponsored by the Consumer Attorneys of California.
Construction industry standards. Senate Bill 530 will require the state Division of Labor Standards to develop a harassment and discrimination prevention policy specifically for the construction industry. Brown vetoed a nearly identical bill last year.
Lactation accommodations. Senate Bill 142 mirrors a San Francisco ordinance that requires employers to provide a lactation room—other than a bathroom—for workers. Employers can be fined $100 for each day a worker is denied appropriate break time and adequate space to express milk.
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSanta Barbara Judge Accused of Moonlighting as Attorney for Secretary/Girlfriend
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Tuesday Newspaper
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-85
- 3Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 4Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 5Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250