Close

Share:

D.R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB

Date: June 01, 2012

In light of the costs and time associated with handling legal disputes in the courts, many businesses are increasingly turning to arbitration as a cost-effective alternative for dispute resolution. In this case DR Horton required that employees bring disputes to arbitration; however, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that those agreements are unenforceable. On appeal, we joined with Pacific Legal Foundation in filing an amicus brief in support of DR Horton. We argued that employers have a legal right to set the terms of employment, and that federal law expressly authorizes these sort of arbitration agreements. 

This appeal involves a dispute over whether employers can require employees to agree to resolve employment disputes through arbitration, rather than through the courts. The NLRB contends that it is an unfair labor practice for an employment contract to contain a waiver of class action rights and to instead provide that disputes shall be resolved individually through arbitration. NFIB has defended employment arbitration agreements, which allow employers to resolve disputes expeditiously and without court costs.

 Status: DECIDED. Amicus brief filed 6/5/12. Court ruled in favor of the employer on 12/04/13.

 http://blog.nfib.com/2013/12/05/nfib-legal-centers-winning-streak-continues-with-three-victories-in-two-days/



blog comments powered by Disqus

Stay Connected to Small Business:

Enter your email to get FREE small business insights. Learn more