The California Supreme Court held that when a court compels an employee to arbitrate their “individual” Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims, the employee retains statutory standing to pursue “non-individual” PAGA claims on behalf of other allegedly aggrieved employees in court. Adolph v. Uber Technologies, No. S274671 (July 17, 2023).
The question before the California Supreme Court was “[w]hether an aggrieved employee who has been compelled to arbitrate [their individual] claims under [PAGA] … maintains statutory standing to pursue PAGA claims arising out of events involving other employees … in court or in any other forum the parties agree is suitable.”
The U.S. Supreme Court held in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906 (2022), that an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) may separate PAGA actions into two sets of claims: (1) the named plaintiff’s “individual” PAGA claims, which may be compelled to arbitration on an individual basis; and (2) the “non-individual” PAGA claims of other allegedly aggrieved employees. In Viking River Cruises, the U.S. Supreme Court also held that, in its view, the “correct course” was to dismiss the “non-individual” PAGA claims because, once compelled to individual arbitration, the named plaintiff is no longer part of the court action and lacks standing to pursue the non-individual PAGA claims in court. But, in her concurring opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor...
President Donald Trump is doubling down on his false claim he was saved by 9/11 first responders immediately after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on New York City. “The failing New York ...