In 5- 4 decision, Supreme Court sides with businesses over workers

WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that businesses can prohibit their workers from banding together in disputes over pay and conditions in the workplace, a decision that affects an estimated 25 million nonunionized employees.

With the court’s five conservative members in the majority, the justices held that individual employees can be forced to use arbitration, not the courts, to air complaints about wages and overtime. Four dissenting liberal justices said the decision will hit low- wage, vulnerable workers especially hard.

While the complaints in Monday’s decision involved pay issues, the outcome might extend to workplace discrimination and other disputes if employee contracts specify theymust be dealt with in one- on- one arbitration.

Workers who want to take action against sexual harassment, pay discrimination, pregnancy discrimination and racial discrimination “may now be forced behind closed doors into an individual, costly — and often secret — arbitration process,” said Fatima Goss Graves, CEO of the NationalWomen’s Law Center.

Lawyers representing management said the decision protects businesses fromendless, costly litigation.

The outcome does not affect people represented by labor unions, but an estimated 25 million employees work under contracts that prohibit collective action by employees who want to raise claims about some aspect of their employment.

The ruling reflected a yearslong pattern at the Supreme Court of limiting class actions and favoring employer- favored arbitration over lawsuits in the courts.

The Trump administration backed the businesses, reversing the position the Obama administration took in favor of employees.

The court’s task was to reconcile federal laws that seemed to point in different directions. Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, said the contracts are valid under the arbitration law. “As a matter of policy these questions are surely debatable. But as a matter of law the answer is clear,” Gorsuch wrote.

In dissent for the court’s liberals, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the decision “egregiously wrong.”

Ginsburg, who read a summary of her dissent aloud to stress her disagreement, said employees do not really have a choice about whether to sign such agreements, labeling them “arm- twisted, takeitor- leave- it contracts.”