NLRB Finds Arbitration Provision Violative of NLRA
1 min read
Feb 2, 2012
D.R. Horton, a homebuilder with operations in more than 20 states, began to require each new and current employee to execute a "Mutual Arbitration Agreement" (MAA) as a condition of employment, requiring arbitration of all claims on a individual basis, precluding them from filing joint, class or collective claims addressing their wages, hours, or other working conditions against the employer in any forum.
Upon review by the NLRB, it concluded that the MAA violated the National Labor Relations Act, specifically Section 7, that protects the rights of employees to "engage in . . . concerted activities for the purpose purpose collective bargaining or other mutual aid" and "to refrain from any and all such activities." The Board found that the employer, by making the MAA a condition of the employment, explicitly restricted activities that were protected by Section 7 of the NLRA, as the Board found that this section protects employees who join together to bring claims on a classwide basis are protected under Section 7.
This decision applies only to employees as defined in the NLRA, and has no impact on managers, supervisors, or independent contractors who are not covered under the NLRA. There are strict state and federal rules governing arbitration agreements.
Featured Insights

Webinar
Apr 29, 2026
When a Cyber Breach Hits: Cybersecurity, Privacy, and Compliance

Event
Apr 23, 2026
Driving Ahead: Insights from Industry Leaders Auto Finance Seminar

In The News
Apr 6, 2026
Ian Wagreich Authors a Chapter in the IICLE’s 2026 “Immigration Law” Handbook

Press Release
Apr 2, 2026
Michelle Michaels Selected to Participate in DWLA Business Development Program

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Apr 2, 2026
Governor Hochul Signs Chapter Amendment to the New York FAIR Business Practices Act

Healthcare Alert
Mar 26, 2026
Are You Beyond the Red Line? Mastering Your FQHC’s Scope of Project to Avoid Noncompliance






