On April 1, 2009, the United States Supreme Court overturned a Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision, and held that provisions in collective bargaining agreements which require union members to arbitrate claims arising under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) are enforceable. 14 Penn Plaza LLC, et al. v. Pyett, et al., No. 07-581 (U.S. April 1, 2009).
In 14 Penn Plaza, the Union and a multi-employer bargaining association (RAB) negotiated a "No Discrimination" clause into their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The "No Discrimination" clause provides:
There shall be no discrimination against any present or future employee by reason of race, creed, color, age, disability, national origin, sex, union membership, or any other characteristic protected by law, including, but not limited to, claims pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, & or any other similar laws, rules, or regulations. All such claims shall be subject to the grievance and arbitration procedures [listed in this CBA] as the sole and exclusive remedy for violations.
Id (emphasis added). Several employees, represented by the Union, filed grievances arising from their transfer to new positions, alleging violations of the CBA and age discrimination under the ADEA. The claims under the ADEA did not go through the arbitration process, but rather through the EEOC and then heard in the federal court system. Both the federal district court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals found in favor of the Union, and further stated that the mandatory arbitration provision of ADEA claims in the CBA was unenforceable.
Subsequently, the U.S. Supreme Court took the case to determine: was the CBA's provision requiring arbitration of age discrimination claims enforceable such that employees were required to pursue their claims before an arbitrator and not in court? The Court answered in the affirmative for a number of reasons. First, the Court recognized that it was bound to recognize and respect the "bargained-for-exchange" represented by the CBA. Id. Second, nothing in the ADEA removes age discrimination cases from the scope of the NLRA; thus, the parties to the CBA are free to negotiate the terms in relation to arbitration and the ADEA. Third, the Court noted, "the ADEA fully applies in the collective-bargaining context & requir[ing] only that an agreement to arbitrate statutory antidiscrimination claims be explicitly stated in the collective bargaining agreement." Id (emphasis added).
To conclude, the Court held that where an employer and a union negotiate contract language which expressly requires the arbitration of statutory discrimination claims, employees who subsequently raise such claims must arbitrate them in accordance with procedures outlined in the parties' CBA.