The D.R. Horton Saga Continues

The D.R. Horton Saga Continues: The Federal Arbitration Act, the National Labor Relations Act and Class Action Arbitrations. D. R. Horton, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013).
Read the case.

The Background. Home builder D.R. Horton required employees to sign a “Mutual Arbitration Agreement” (MAA) as a condition of employment. The MAA provided that all disputes and claims between Horton and its employees (including claims for wages, benefits and other compensation) would be determined by final and binding arbitration. In addition, the MAA provided that arbitrators would not “have the authority to consolidate the claims of other employees,” conduct an arbitration as a class action, or award relief to a group of employees in a single arbitration proceeding.

Several years later, a group of Horton employees became concerned that Horton had misclassified them as exempt employees in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Horton argued that the MAA prohibited them from bringing these claims to arbitration as a group. Read More →