August 3, 2020

Volume X, Number 216

July 31, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

SDNY Judge Rules Agreements to Arbitrate Sexual Harassment Claims Are Enforceable, Despite New York Law

A New York Federal District Court Judge ruled last week that an agreement to arbitrate sexual harassment claims is enforceable despite a New York law prohibiting mandatory arbitration agreements covering sexual harassment claims.  This is one of the first reported decisions to address the viability of the New York law since its enactment in 2018.  While this is the opinion of one judge, albeit a highly respected one, it suggests that employers may continue to require the arbitration of sexual harassment claims.

In the case, a former employee sued his employer for discrimination and harassment, including sexual harassment. The employer moved to compel arbitration on the grounds that the employee had signed an agreement to arbitrate any claims. The arbitration provision explicitly provided that it would be “governed by and interpreted in accordance with the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”).” In granting the employer’s motion to compel arbitration, Judge Cote found that “the FAA’s policy favoring the enforcement of arbitration agreements is not easily displaced by state law” and that “when state law prohibits outright the arbitration of a particular type of claim … the conflicting rule is displaced by the FAA.”  

We note that this decision could be appealed and forthcoming decisions in federal and state courts may reach a different outcome, but assuming it stands and others follow suit, it will also greatly impact recent amendments to the New York law extending the ban on mandatory arbitration provisions to all discrimination claims (which we wrote about here).  

We will continue to update you with new developments in this area as they occur, so stay tuned.  In the meantime, while some employers may opt to continue using arbitration provisions for all discrimination claims including sexual harassment claims, in light of this decision, we recommend first engaging in an analysis of whether using an arbitration provision for sexual harassment (or other discrimination) claims makes sense from a business perspective.

©1994-2020 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume IX, Number 190


About this Author

Brie Kluytenaar, Mintz Levin, New York, Employment Relations Lawyer, Arbitration Attorney
Practice Group Associate

Brie represents a wide range of companies and has consistently achieved successful results for clients in fields including financial services, health care, technology, hospitality, media and cultural organizations. She has extensive experience resolving the many issues employers face throughout the employment life cycle, including counseling employers on hiring, terminations, reductions in force, internal investigations, wage and hour issues, disability and accommodations, statutory leave, and compliance with the rapidly-changing employment regulatory landscape.

Brie also has...