SCOTUS Green Lights Class Action Waivers in Major Win for Employers
The United States Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that employees must submit claims to arbitration on an individualized basis when their employment agreements require it, even when those claims could be brought as class or collective action under federal legislation such as the Fair Labor Standards Act. Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch held that parties to an arbitration agreement are bound by their agreement, as the Federal Arbitration Act envisioned. The Court cited the long history of supporting private arbitration agreements as an efficient and cost-effective means of handling disputes between parties, including parties to an employment agreement who have a dispute over wages.
The Plaintiffs had argued that the requirement to arbitrate claims individually instead of through class or collective actions conflicted with the National Labor Relations Act’s focus on collective activity. Nothing in the NLRA, the Court observed, granted employees the right to bring class or collective claims. Likewise, the Court disagreed that there was any Chevron deference (deference to an administrative tribunal such as the NLRB) that required collective treatment of claims outside of the law the NLRB was charged to enforce. In other words, Plaintiffs could not use the NLRA to craft an argument that they were entitled to litigate collectively under the FLSA.
The opinion was the result of three cases that came before Court. One, the Ernst & Young case, involved a class-wide challenge to the company's use of an FLSA exemption. Because the parties had an agreement to arbitrate employment claims through individual arbitration, the company moved to compel arbitration. The employer was successful before the district court, only to have the appellate court overrule it. But the High Court fully embraced the mandate of the Federal Arbitration Act and remanded the case where arbitration will now be compelled over the individual wage claim only. We can expect a flurry of motions to compel individualized arbitrations to hit the dockets in class and collective claims currently pending throughout the country.
This represents a major victory for employers. Barring amendments to laws such as the FLSA to carve out class/collective treatment from the Federal Arbitration Act, this opinion will have a significant impact on the use of employment agreements to stem the tide of costly, time-consuming collective and class actions in federal court. We recommend a carefully crafted employment agreement with a properly tailored arbitration provision that requires arbitration of all employment claims on an individual, not class or collective, basis. Grant the arbitrator the ability to award all benefits set forth in the statue so that full relief can be granted. These provisions should go a long way to limiting an employer's exposure to future federal class and collective claims.
Featured Insights

Healthcare Alert
Jul 24, 2026
Q&A: Right to Electronic Monitoring Extended to Illinois Assisted and Shared Living Facilities

Press Release
Jul 23, 2026
Insurance Partner Christophe Burusco Joins Hinshaw in Los Angeles

In The News
Jul 16, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Anticipates Epic Battle Between “Titans of the Antitrust Bar”

Press Release
Jul 15, 2026
Two Hinshaw Partners Recognized in Minnesota Monthly's 2026 Top Lawyers in Minnesota

Event
July 13-15, 2026
Hinshaw Proudly Sponsors 2026 Lavender Law Conference and Career Fair

Webinar
Jul 14, 2026
Scott Seaman Presents on Horizontal vs. Vertical Exhaustion of Insurance

Healthcare Alert
Jul 8, 2026
A New Era of Compliance Standards for California DSOs and MSOs After the Aspen Dental Settlement

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 7, 2026
What Insurers Need to Know About California’s FAIR Plan Assessment Recoupment Guidance

In The News
Jul 6, 2026
Francesco Palanda’s Practical Guide for Mitigating AI-Related Business Interruption Risk


