Last year presented many challenges, and 2021 offers a fresh start. In this issue of the Class Actions Trends Report we review the most significant developments of 2020 and look ahead to what a new year and a new presidential administration may mean for employers.
Articles Discussing Employment Law Class Actions
In recent years, there has been an uptick of W-2 phishing scams, and their consequences for an employer extend well beyond leaked data, including potential employee class action litigation. Just last week, a federal court in Illinois rejected a motion for class certification in a data breach case alleging disclosure
Last year presented many challenges, and 2021 offers a fresh start. In this issue of the Class Actions Trends Report we review the most significant developments of 2020 and take a look forward to what a new year and a new presidential administration may mean for employers.
While most employers’ collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) require that class action grievances be submitted to an arbitrator for adjudication, employers in the manufacturing industry may want to consider extra precautions as special issues exist when employing large groups of employees working under the same conditions and schedules and in the same workspaces.
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to alter work lives in profound ways, employers are confronted with additional liability risks. The pandemic has created a wave of litigation that is unlikely to ebb until well after the unprecedented public health crisis recedes. In this issue, Jackson Lewis attorneys discuss the risks of
“Incentive” or “service” awards to lead plaintiffs in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (Rule 23) class actions are unlawful, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has ruled in a suit brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that “incentive” or “service” awards to lead plaintiffs in Rule 23 class actions are unlawful. It is the first circuit court of appeals to expressly invalidate such awards as a matter of law. (Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, No. 18-12344, September 17,
Recently, and for the first time in more than 20 years, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled on the transportation worker exemption contained in Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). In Waithaka v. Amazon.com, Inc., 966 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2020), the court
Employers continue to grapple with an ongoing, unprecedented public health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and its after-effects, which have profoundly disrupted the nation’s economy and U.S. workplaces.
Check out our Winter 2020 Class Action Trends Report. Our quarterly report discusses new developments in class action litigation and offers strategic guidance and tactical tips on how to defend such claims. This issue covers using data analytics. Read it here.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has denied en banc review of a ruling that created a new framework for when employees who have entered into arbitration agreements receive collective action notices.
Earlier this year, in a case of first impression, the Seventh Circuit developed a required
On January 31, 2020, the district court in Chamber of Commerce of the United States, et al. v. Becerra, et al., E.D. Cal. Case No. 2:19-cv-2456, granted the request for a preliminary injunction enjoining the State of California (the State) from enforcing Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51) against arbitration agreements governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). A week later, on February 7, 2020, the court issued its written order detailing the court’s reasoning for granting the preliminary injunction.
On Christmas Eve, the Third Circuit issued a decision restricting certification of wage/hour classes for off-the-clock cases and increasing the threshold for other wage/hour matters. See Ferreras v. American Airlines, Inc. (Dec. 24, 2019). While this decision may reduce the number of wage/hour class actions certified in the Third Circuit (which covers Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the Virgin Islands), it is predicted to cause an increase in the number of wage/hour class action filings in New Jersey state courts. As discussed in our previous legal alert, the recently enacted New Jersey Wage Theft Act by itself will undoubtedly spark an increase in New Jersey state court filings because of the significant increase in damages and lower burden of proof compared to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Third Circuit’s decision will likely result in even more state court wage/hour class action filings.
Reinforcing the burden on any putative class to satisfy all of the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed the district court’s order denying the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in an employment discrimination action. Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp., No. 18-35791 (9th Cir. Dec. 24, 2019).