Finally, the parties agreed to arbitrate any controversies under the agreement under the American Arbitration Association’s (“AAA”) “Employment Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures” and the agreement gave the arbiter authority to award any damages or remedies authorized by law, including costs and attorneys’ fees.Īfter FCM terminated Lane’s employment, Lane filed a complaint for damages, in which he claimed that FCM had wrongfully terminated him, failed to pay a proper bonus, and engaged in unlawful labor practices. The arbitration agreement further specified that any arbitration would be governed by the laws of California. In the arbitration agreement, Lane and FCM agreed that all employment-related disputes would be submitted to arbitration, excluding claims for worker’s compensation, unemployment benefits, as well as certain administrative claims. As a condition of his employment, Lane executed an arbitration agreement. ![]() FCM had hired Lane to work as an investment analyst. (“Lane”) and his former employer, Francis Capital Management LLC (“FCM”). This case arose from a dispute between Martin Keith Lane, Jr. 4 th 676 (2014), the California Court of Appeal found that California Labor Code Section 229 empowers a worker to maintain a court action for unpaid wages pursuant to the California Labor Code regardless of whether or not that worker had signed an arbitration agreement. California Labor Code Section 229 Allows Workers to Maintain an Action for Unpaid Wages in Court Notwithstanding an Arbitration AgreementĪ recent decision confirms that workers may bring unpaid wages claims to court even though they may have agreed to arbitrate all employment-related disputes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |