Skip to main content

Oakland Raiders File a Motion to Compel Arbitration: Will the Case Leave the Court System?


As readers of the blog are familiar with, a wage and hour lawsuit was brought against the Oakland Raiders earlier this year on the grounds that the cheerleaders were not paid at least minimum wage for their work done as part of the cheerleading team.  (Oakland Raiders Cheerleader - Blog).  

The Raiders responded to the suit and asserted, in part, that the claim could not be litigated in the courts and instead should be sent to arbitration.  The Raiders pointed to the terms of the contract that the cheerleaders signed which stated that any dispute that arose in regard to the agreement would be sent to binding arbitration, with the N.F.L. Commissioner to serve as the sole arbitrator.  (Oakland Raiders Cheerleader Contract - page 29 addressed the arbitration provision).  

Last week, the Raiders filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration of this case.  If the court grants the Motion, it would remove this case from the public eye and allow Roger Goodell, the N.F.L. Commissioner, to be the sole ruler of the outcome of this dispute. 

As of this point, the case remains in the California court system, but this arbitration provision that the cheerleaders agreed to could throw pose to be an insurmountable hurdle.  The Raiders would obviously prefer this case go to mediation where they would likely get a more favorable (and likely non-appealable ruling) from the Commissioner, while the cheerleaders would prefer this case stay in the court system with an option to appeal, depending upon the judge's ruling.  

Link to the Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by the Raiders:  http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/RaidersMotion+03.14.14.pdf

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more