Skip to main content

Want to Enforce Agreements Against Your Employees? Make Sure to Translate the Entire Document, Not Just Portions of It...


Carmona et al. v. Lincoln Millennium Car Wash Inc. et al. - California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight

Facts:  Current and former employees sued Lincoln Millennium Car Wash and other employers and alleged wage and hour violations.  The employers sought to compel arbitration in the case.  At issue was an arbitration clause in the employment agreement that the employees had signed.  While both the arbitration clause and a confidentiality clause had been translated into Spanish, the portion of the confidentiality clause that set forth the enforceability of arbitration and the fact that the employees were waiving their rights to appear before a court were not translated.  When the employment agreements were given to the employees, the sections that were not translated were not verbally explained, nor was the fact that arbitration would become binding in the event of a dispute verbally explained either. 

At trial, the court ruled that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable and refused to enforce it on the grounds that the employers failed to translate key provisions of the agreement or give the employees time to review the employment agreements before signing.  The employers appealed.   

HoldingThe Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's ruling and held the arbitration provision was unconscionable and therefore could not be enforced against the employees.  In essence, the Court of Appeal noted that the employers hid the enforceability clause by failing to translate that portion of the employment agreement into Spanish.  The fact that portions of the agreement were translated into Spanish, but not all portions, signified that the employers evidently knew that the employees required Spanish translations of all of the employment agreement in order to understand it.

Judgment:  The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's ruling and held that the arbitration provision in the employment agreement was unconscionable and therefore unenforceable.

The Takeaway:  Employers need to use some common sense when choosing to translate employment agreements or other employment related documents.  If only a portion of the document is translated, and other portions related to the enforceability or other "waiver of rights" portions are not, courts will likely not take kindly to this type of perceived deception.  Smart employers will ensure that the entire document is translated, or at the very least, allow employees time to review documents that are required to be signed and ask any questions they may have

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Flier

Date:  April 21, 2014

Opinion:  http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/B248143.PDF

Comments

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,...

Breaking: Labor Secretary Rumored to Be Leaving Administration

A few hours ago, word leaked out that Labor Secretary Marty Walsh (“Walsh”) is in the midst of negotiations to head up the NHL Players Union and leave his position at the Labor Department. Walsh, who has served as the sole Labor Secretary under President Biden, has taken part in a labor renaissance of sorts as support for organized labor has increased during his term as Labor Secretary (although the number of workers that have joined a union over the past two years has not grown as mush as some expected.)  He has also overseen the ongoing negotiations with rail workers over a new contract, although that matter is still on shaky ground and playing out as we speak. As for who might step into the vacant Labor Secretary role, there are already rumblings that President Biden should nominate Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su (a strong labor advocate) or even a progressive like Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until Walsh officially gives his notice, however, I would expect some/many potential...

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie Vetoes Minimum Wage Hike

A few months ago, readers might remember that I pointed out that the New Jersey Legislature had voted to approve a minimum wage hike in the state .  Under the approved legislation, the minimum wage rate would rise to $10.10/hour in the next year and at least $15/hour over the next five.  (The current minimum wage rate in the state is $8.38/hour).  In that article, I had noted that the bill was then going to go before Governor Chris Christie for his approval or veto. As I had suggested previously, I thought that the Governor would likely veto the bill based upon his prior actions and comments on similar legislation.  Well, a few days ago, Governor Christie did just that and vetoed the bill on the grounds that it "would trigger an escalation of wages that will make doing business in New Jersey unfathomable."  Pointing to the increase in hourly minimum wage rates, the Governor referred to the bill as a "really radical increase."  (It is interesting to c...