|
||||
|
||||
14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett: Into the Abyss between Judicial Process and Collectively Bargained Agreements to Arbitrate Individual Statutory ClaimsEric B. SpositoNational Labor Relations Board March 25, 2010 Rutgers Law Record, Vol. 38, 2010-2011 Rutgers School of Law-Newark Research Paper No. 073 Abstract: On April 1st, 2009 a bitterly divided United States Supreme Court, by a vote of 5-4, turned the world of labor arbitration on its head. The Court’s opinion in 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett overturned 35 years of jurisprudence, grounded in Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. dictum, by establishing that collectively bargained clauses expressly authorizing the arbitration of statutory claims are enforceable, either compelling arbitration or precluding the grant of an award in a judicial action. Grounding their decision, in part, on the prominent “Steelworkers Trilogy” case United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel, the Court in Pyett narrowed the Gardner-Denver Court’s view on whether a union can waive a member’s right to seek judicial determination of a statutory right.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 24 Keywords: 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett, arbitration of statutory claims, collective bargaining agreements, union arbitration Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: March 30, 2010 ; Last revised: April 25, 2011Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.500 seconds