Call Us for a Free Case Review

609.243.0300

201.820.0644

Zatuchni & Associates
  • About
    • Firm Overview
    • About David Zatuchni
    • Recent Employment Law Settlements And Verdicts
  • Practice Areas
    • Racial Discrimination & Harassment
    • Ethnic Discrimination & Harassment
    • Sex Discrimination
    • Sexual Harassment
    • Age Discrimination & Harassment
    • Associational Discrimination and Harassment
    • View All Practice Areas
  • Blog
  • Locations
    • Lambertville Office
    • Hackensack Office
    • Other Areas We Serve
  • Contact
    • Free Case Review
Arbitration Agreements

Federal Court Rules the Federal Arbitration Act Demands the Arbitration of NJLAD Claims

David Zatuchni

Published on April 20, 2021
FacebookTweetPinPrint

Arbitration in a Nutshell

Many New Jersey employers routinely require employees to sign an arbitration clause as a condition of their employment. In other words, in exchange for the job, the employee agrees to waive his or her right to litigate claims against the employer in court. Instead, the employee consents to submit those claims to arbitration – a dispute resolution process in which the parties submit arguments and evidence to an arbitrator, who then issues a decision on the matter.

Employers prefer arbitration because, generally speaking, it moves faster than litigation and uses relaxed evidentiary rules in comparison.  Moreover, instead of deciding in favor of one party over the other, arbitrators often “split the difference” between them.  On the whole, arbitration allows employers to resolve disputes more quickly, avoiding costly jury verdicts and attorneys’ fees.  Conversely, employees prefer litigation since its stricter evidentiary rules allow for the discovery of more information helpful to their claims.  Additionally, the time-consuming, risky, and costly nature of litigation gives the employee leverage in the dispute.

Amended LAD Prohibits Arbitration Clauses for LAD Claims

In 2019, the New Jersey legislature became concerned that employers were strong-arming employees into arbitrating discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims via arbitration clauses.  As such, the legislature amended the Law Against Discrimination (or “LAD”) to provide:

(a) A provision in any employment contract that waives any substantive or procedural right or remedy relating to a claim of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment shall be deemed against public policy and unenforceable.

(b) No right or remedy under the “Law Against Discrimination,” P.L. 1945, c.169 (C.10:5-1 et seq.) or any other statute or case law shall be prospectively waived.

On its face, then, the amended LAD prohibited employers from requiring employees to agree to arbitrate any potential discrimination, harassment, or retaliation claims as a condition of employment.  But a tricky legal issue remained: a federal law, the Federal Arbitration Act (or “FAA”), simultaneously provided that:

“A written provision in . . . a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction . . . shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.” (emphasis added).

Further, to really hammer the point home, the FAA stated that such a “written provision” “foreclose[s] state legislative attempts to undercut the enforceability of arbitration agreements.”

The plain language of the FAA, then, seemed to invalidate the LAD’s prohibition against arbitration clauses.  The question arose: given the FAA, did the LAD’s prohibition have any teeth?

The New Jersey District Court Holds the FAA Preempts the LAD

In March 2021, the New Jersey District Court settled the question in N.J. Civil Justice Institute v. Grewal, ruling that the FAA “preempts”, or overrides, the LAD’s ban on arbitration clauses.  Key to the Court’s decision was the FAA’s clearly articulated policy in favor of arbitration agreements, as well as the long line of court decisions upholding arbitration provisions under the FAA.

As it now stands, then, the LAD does not provide employees with a defense against enforcing an arbitration clause with regard to their discrimination, harassment, or retaliation claims.  However, other contractual defects may apply to render such a clause unenforceable – for instance, if the clause is worded in a vague or confusing way, such that the employee isn’t adequately apprised that they are signing away their right to a jury trial.  If you have a question regarding an arbitration provision, or your legal options relating to a workplace issue, call our offices today for a free consultation.

Related posts:

  1. New Jersey Courts Uphold COVID-Related Whistleblower Claims
  2. Are Employer “White Privilege” Workshops Legal Under Anti-Discrimination Employment Laws?
  3. Interpreting New Jersey S121: Impacts on Arbitration Agreements & Non-Disclosure Agreements
Home / Arbitration Agreements / Federal Court Rules the Federal Arbitration Act Demands the Arbitration of NJLAD Claims
FacebookTweetPinPrint
David Zatuchni
David Zatuchni graduated from Northwestern University School of Law in 1995. Since that time, he has exclusively practiced in the field of employment law. For many years, Mr. Zatuchni defended large corporations in all types of employment discrimination lawsuits and labor law matters. Read More

Free Case Study

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Other Articles You May Like

Legal gavel
Arbitration Agreements

Interpreting New Jersey S121: Impacts on Arbitration Agreements & Non-Disclosure Agreements

0 Comments

Join the conversation

You must be logged in to post a comment.

About
  • Firm Overview
  • About David Zatuchni
  • Recent Employment Law Settlements and Verdicts
  • Contact

Super Lawyer rating

Member of the National Employment Lawyers Association

Zatuchni & Associates LLC BBB accredited business profile
BBB RATING: A+
Practice Areas
  • Racial Discrimination & Harassment
  • Ethnic Discrimination & Harassment
  • Sex Discrimination
  • Sexual Harassment Claims
  • Age Discrimination & Harassment
Lambertville Office

287 South Main Street, (Route 29)
Lambertville, NJ 08530

Phone: 609-243-0300

Hackensack Office

2 University Plaza, Suite 100
Hackensack, NJ 07601

Phone: (201) 820-0644

Copyright © 2025 Zatuchni Law. All rights reserved.

  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright Notice
  • Disclaimer
  • Site Map