保守的美国最高法院’维权人士的议程正在强制性仲裁领域全面展开。在里面 AT&T v. Concepcion 案例(请参阅 2011年7月6日的先前博客),美国最高法院将拇指牢牢地放在雇主身上’s side 的 the scales 的 justice by overturning past law 和 holding that there is no per se invalidation 的 class action arbitration provisions (Concepcion is a consumer class action case). Now the US Supreme Court apparently wishes to tip the scales at the opposite end 的 the spectrum: by applying this class action holding to individual 伯曼听证会s brought by California workers for the payment 的 wages. The US Supreme Court has reached out 和 vacated (as well as remanded) the 加州最高法院’s holding in Sonic-Calabasas诉Moreno (2011)51 Cal.4th 659.为什么可以’美国最高法院不在我们的后院吗?
美国最高法院撤消的裁定相当有限。它只是维护了一名员工’s right to a “Berman hearing” before the California Labor Commissioner, pursuant to California Labor Code, section 98, for the payment 的 unpaid wages. 伯曼听证会s are a streamlined administrative procedure for employees to recover unpaid wages–包括加班费,进餐和休息时间工资以及等待时间的罚款–without having to go to court, allowing many employees who cannot afford a lawyer the ability to stand up for their workplace rights. The right to a 伯曼听证会 protected by the 加州最高法院 in Sonic-Calabasas was limited to the first instance only; the 加州最高法院 permitted the employer to enforce a mandatory arbitration 的 the employee’下一步上诉,否则将在高等法院进行。
美国最高法院根据康塞普西翁(Concepcion)撤消了这一意见。看到, 声波卡拉巴萨斯诉莫雷诺 (2011年10月31日)第10-1450号。美国最高法院是否真的认为应该消除一审行政听证的次要权利?是否真的相信雇主有权劫持一个良性的行政程序以使雇员有权获得其基本工资?