SCOTUS Holds Class Action Waivers Do Not Violate the NLRA
Time 3 Minute Read
Categories: Class Action

In a major win for employers, the U.S. Supreme Court held that arbitration agreements with class action waivers do not violate the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). As reported on the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives Blog, the Supreme Court’s narrow 5-4 decision paves the way for employers to include such waivers in arbitration agreements to avoid class and collective actions.

The case, Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, presented a rather straightforward, yet hotly disputed question—whether class action waivers violate employees’ rights under Section 7 of the NLRA’s catch-all provision, which permits employees to engage in “other concerted activities for the purpose of...other mutual aid or protection.” 29 U.S.C. § 157.

In resolving this issue, the Supreme Court was forced to balance the Federal Arbitration Act’s requirement to “respect and enforce agreements to arbitrate” with Section 7's rights to engage in “other concerted activities.” The Supreme Court held that Section 7’s catch-all provision referred to organization-related activities similar to those listed in the statute—not joining class litigation.

As held by the Court, “[the NLRA] does not express approval or disapproval of arbitration. It does not mention class or collective action procedures. It does not even hint at a wish to displace the Arbitration Act—let alone accomplish that much clearly and manifestly, as our precedents demand.”

The decision repeatedly cited GC Memorandum 10-06, authored by Ronald Meisburg, the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB’s”) then-General Counsel and current Special Counsel at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. In this memorandum penned eight years ago, Meisburg took the now-adopted position that the NLRA does not bar such class waivers.

The case resolves a circuit split that had been brewing for six years. In 2012, a plurality of the NLRB first held that class action waivers violated Section 7. See D.R. Horton, 357 NLRB 2277 (2012). The Sixth, Seventh and Ninth Circuits followed the NLRB’s lead, while the Second, Fifth and Eighth Circuits found such waivers to be valid.

As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision, employers may now include class action waivers in arbitration agreements without fear of violating the NLRA. Employers are reminded, however, that arbitration agreements are subject to state-specific requirements governing contract formation. In some states, employers may be required to offer additional consideration to modify their agreements to include class action waivers.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 3 Minute Read

The results are in: attorneys are filing more employment law cases in court.  Indeed, year-end reporting from legal databases like LexMachina confirm that the pace of filing new employment discrimination cases reached its highest level in 2025, surpassing 20,000 new filings nationwide.  Though overtime and minimum wage lawsuits under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) have continued to decline since 2015, discrimination cases under laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act are on the rise.

Time 1 Minute Read

A recent federal court decision determined that documents created by a criminal defendant using AI and subsequently shared with legal counsel were not shielded by attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. In USA v. Heppner, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York compelled the disclosure of 31 documents created with Anthropic’s Claude. This order was issued despite the defendant including information from counsel in the AI tool’s input and later providing the resulting outputs to his attorneys. The ruling offers early judicial perspective on privilege concerns involving AI-generated materials, an area where case law remains sparse.

Time 1 Minute Read

A recent federal court ruling held that AI-generated documents prepared by a defendant and later shared with legal counsel were not protected by attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine.

Time 3 Minute Read

The National Labor Relations Board (“Board” or NLRB) can have up to five sitting Board members, but only three are needed for the NLRB to have a quorum. The Board had been without a quorum for most of last year but now has three sitting members thanks to two new additions last month. It marked the first time since the start of President Trump’s second term that a majority of Board members have been Republicans.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page