High court ruling hurts class-action lawsuits
In 5-4 vote, employers can insist on arbitration
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court dealt an initial blow to millions of workers Monday in the first of two major disputes this term pitting corporations against labor unions.
In a 5-4 decision controlled by the court’s conservative wing, the justices ruled that employers have the right to insist that labor disputes get resolved individually, rather than allowing workers to join together in class-action lawsuits.
Millions of workers routinely sign such arbitration agreements unknowingly, only to find out later that they are barred from collective action. About 25 million workers are affected by those contracts.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the decision, joined by the other four conservatives on the court. It was the longest-pending case before the justices, having been heard on the first day of the term last October.
“As a matter of policy, these questions are surely debatable,” Gorsuch
said. Still, he said, “this court is not free to substitute its preferred economic policies for those chosen by the people’s representatives.”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the dissent, joined by the other three liberals. She summarized it from the bench, something justices do only rarely to signify their objections.
“When workers charge their employers with unlawful conduct — in this case, violations of laws governing wages earned and hours worked — there is strength in numbers,” Ginsburg said.
As a result of the ruling, she said, “there will be huge under-enforcement of federal and state statutes designed to advance the well-being of vulnerable workers.”
The high court heard oral arguments in three separate forced arbitration cases on Oct. 2. Then in February, it heard a more closely watched case chal- lenging public employees unions’ collection of fees from non-members in nearly two dozen states. The court’s conservatives appear set to render another 5-4 ruling against the unions in that case.
“Unfortunately, the Supreme Court term is not over,” said Craig Becker, the AFL-CIO’s general counsel and a former member of the National Labor Relations Board.
The justices have been deferential in the past to arbitration agreements, which are favored by many employers as a way to resolve disputes over pay, benefits and other matters without going to court. Last year, 54% of companies reported using arbitration clauses in contracts. About one-third of the contracts barred workers from banding together.
The nation’s major business trade groups lined up in favor of the three employers: Epic Systems, a Wisconsin health care software company; Ernst & Young accountants; and Murphy Oil, which operates gas stations in 26 states.