Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Anti-Arbitration Bill Approved by California Legislature

By Bryan Hawkins on August 31, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

* October 11, 2015 Update: Governor Brown announced he has vetoed AB 465

On August 27, 2015, the California Assembly approved AB 465. The bill, which was approved by the California Senate on August 24, would prohibit California employers from requiring most individuals to enter into arbitration agreements as a condition of their employment.

For years, California employees have primarily relied on the doctrine of unconscionability to argue against the enforceability of arbitration agreements. This argument typically requires two things: first, a showing that the agreement is procedurally unconscionable, meaning that there was some unfairness in the procedure or method in which the agreement was presented to the employee, and second, a showing that the agreement was substantively unconscionable, meaning that its terms were overly harsh or one-sided. If signed by Governor Brown, AB 465 would change that analysis.

AB 465 provides that arbitration agreements, and other waivers of legal rights, must be “knowing and voluntary and in writing, and expressly not made as a condition of employment.” This would represent a shift in California law as it would allow employees to invalidate arbitration agreements without a showing of both procedural and substantive unconscionability. In addition to this change, AB 465 makes several other changes, including (1) placing the burden of proving that an arbitration agreement was proper on the employer, (2) making arbitration agreements required as a condition of employment per se invalid, and (3) providing employees who are successful in invalidating these types of agreements the right to recover their attorneys’ fees.

With its passage by the California Assembly, the bill now goes to Governor Brown for his signature. Even if Governor Brown chooses not to sign the measure, employers should make sure that their arbitration agreements are in compliance with the current state of California law. If the bill is signed, however, then employers with operations in California should immediately take steps to ensure that their arbitration agreements comply with the new law or risk an influx in lawsuits brought by both individual and classes of employees.

 

Photo of Bryan Hawkins Bryan Hawkins

Bryan Hawkins Bryan Hawkins is a litigator practicing in the firm’s Labor & Employment group with extensive jury and bench-trial experience in representing employers in employment-related litigation in court and before administrative agencies such as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and…

Bryan Hawkins Bryan Hawkins is a litigator practicing in the firm’s Labor & Employment group with extensive jury and bench-trial experience in representing employers in employment-related litigation in court and before administrative agencies such as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. His practice also involves counseling employers on employment-related issues, including handbooks and policies. Bryan also provides counseling on labor issues, such as advising employers on how to effectively respond to union organizing campaigns, negotiate collective bargaining agreements, and manage the employer/union relationship. In addition, Bryan’s practice includes litigating complex commercial disputes in areas such as antitrust, business torts, and real estate.

Click here for Bryan Hawkins’ full bio.

Read more about Bryan HawkinsEmailBryan's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    World of Employment
  • Organization:
    Stoel Rives LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo