Footnotes (23)



What's Left to Remedy Wage Theft? How Arbitration Mandates that Bar Class Actions
Impact Low-Wage Workers

Nantiya Ruan

University of Denver Sturm College of Law

October 10, 2012

Michigan State Law Review, Forthcoming
U Denver Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-36

For low-wage workers who suffer “wage theft” – employers illegally withholding portions of their wages – the dollars missing from their paychecks violate existing law and significantly impact the well-being of individuals, families, and communities. Despite this dire societal problem, the Supreme Court continues “closing the courtroom doors” in two ways: allowing employers to force workers out of court and into private arbitration; and prohibiting aggregate claims. Such trends, in combination, silence wage theft, leaving many claims unheard while unscrupulous employers gain direct advantage.

This Article explains how various procedural rulings have combined to prevent meaningful redress for wage theft. Because of high transaction costs and relatively low potential damages, low-wage workers are likely to recover their lost wages only if they band together with similarly-situated workers in an aggregate lawsuit. However, collective action is under attack: AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the latest Supreme Court case to approve of mandatory arbitration clauses, allowed a corporation to impose “agreements” mandating individual arbitration and barring class actions.

This Article brings new insights into the widening blind spot the Supreme Court has for the impact procedural rules have on the substantive rights of low-wage workers. Moreover, it touches upon a greater trend in American jurisprudence of courts shutting out plaintiffs, especially those unlikely to afford legal representation. By drawing attention to the unjust effects of facially neutral rules on low-wage workers, this Article contributes to the national conversation on how Supreme Court precedent limiting judicial access affects society’s most vulnerable.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 47

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: October 10, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Ruan, Nantiya, What's Left to Remedy Wage Theft? How Arbitration Mandates that Bar Class Actions Impact Low-Wage Workers (October 10, 2012). Michigan State Law Review, Forthcoming; U Denver Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-36. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159963 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2159963

Contact Information

Nantiya Ruan (Contact Author)
University of Denver Sturm College of Law ( email )
2255 E. Evans Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
United States

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 517
Downloads: 99
Download Rank: 202,441
Footnotes:  23

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.219 seconds