Many employers see binding arbitration agreements on labour-related disputes as useful tools for resolving workplace issues without costly litigation. In order to preserve the integrity of these agreements, it is important to ensure that they comply with evolving standards of the NBR`s decision-making law. Not only can a poorly worded binding arbitration agreement in its written version not be enforced, but maintaining such a directive, even without attempting to enforce it, may constitute an unfair labor practice, in accordance with Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA. Finally, based on Epic Systems` guidelines, the NLRB found that the confidentiality provision in question «does not limit the things that employees do only for themselves in the exercise of their right to free association in the workplace» protected by the NRA. «Closing an arbitral award or disseminating evidence or information obtained solely through participation as a party to the arbitration,» the NLRB said, «are not things that employees `simply do.`» On one side of the line reigns the FAA; on the other side, the NLRA. Here, the arbitration agreement falls «on the side of the FAA-regulated line» and must be applied «as written.» For all these reasons, the NLRB decided that the provision was legal. The National Labor Relations Board («BOARD» or «NLRB») continues to address the issue of the validity of binding arbitration agreements requiring individualized conciliation of labor-related claims under the National Labor Relations Act («NLRA»). Generally speaking, such arbitration agreements are valid as long as they do not violate an employee`s right to complain about unfair labour practices and to have other means of accessing the procedures and procedures of the board of directors. The recent decision of the Board of Directors of Alexandria Care Center, LLC, 369 NLRB No. 94 (June 2, 2020) is the Board`s latest direction for the development of valid arbitration agreements.
Employers and their employees may enter into individual arbitration agreements to resolve labor law disputes in accordance with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that agreements containing class and class action waiver statements that stipulate that labor disputes must be handled through individual arbitration proceedings must not violate the NRA and be enforced under the FAA. Second, the Chamber`s decision to declare the confidentiality provision legal is largely explained by the fact that the clause was closely adapted to the evidence discovered at the time of the discovery of the arbitration and to the content of the arbitral award. . . .