The first Monday in October marked the beginning of the Supreme Court’s new term year. The Court announced it will hear at least several cases that will impact the human resources, labor relations, and employment relations fields.

As of September SCOTUS had accepted at least 45 cases. More will come.  The average annual SCOTUS docket totals around 70 cases. They receive 7,000 petitions for review the Court gets each year, according to the Legal Memorandum put out by The Heritage Foundation.

ASE is keeping an eye on the following cases:

Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Counsel 31. This case will decide whether unions can compel public employees to pay a fee to the union for representation purposes even if the worker opts out of the union. This case reviews a 1977 decision that originated out of Detroit where the Supreme Court held that public employees that are represented by a union must at least pay an agency fee for their “fair share” of the union’s operation expenses – Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977).  The Supreme Court will look at whether an adjusted fee that attempts to remove the cost of political activities from the union and get the dues to just administrative costs is sufficient to protect the worker’s First Amendment rights.

Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital. Though this case has not been placed on the docket, when heard it will bring to a head whether Title VII’s sex discrimination prohibition extends to sexual orientation or not. Some court jurisdictions have ruled Congress did not define sex discrimination to the point of also prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and therefore its protections do not extend to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals. Other court jurisdictions as well as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have recognized sexual orientation as protected by the Act’s sex discrimination provision.

This case should be put on the SCOTUS docket this term.

Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, Hector et.al.  This case works on the proper application of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Department of Labor’s exemption rules. Car salesmen and mechanics are exempt from certain record keeping and overtime requirements of the FLSA. The car dealership argues that these rules should not apply to “Advisors” either.

NLRB V. Murphy Oil/Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis. This is one of the biggest employment decisions to come along in years. SCOTUS agreed to hear the issue.  Arguments were held October 2, 2017 on whether arbitration agreements whereby employees agree to use arbitration individually en lieu of bringing class action lawsuits as a group are legal or not. This case started when the Obama Administration’s Justice Department stated arbitration agreements prohibiting class action lawsuits were illegal and against National Labor Relations Act’s  protections for concerted activity.  But now this position is opposed by the Trump Administration’s Justice Department, and they are championing the Federal Arbitration Act’s right to agree to arbitration. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will at the same time continue to oppose the right to arbitrate in favor of workers’ concerted activity rights.

Although in other cases, SCOTUS has endorsed class action waivers for consumer agreements such as those used by cellphone and car rental businesses, the opposing argument states employment contracts are different from consumer contracts because of the National Labor Relations Act protections.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated, “This will be a first for me in the nearly 25 years I’ve served on the court.” She went on to state to Georgetown law students at a talk earlier in the month, “There is only one prediction that is entirely safe about the upcoming term… and that is it will be momentous.”

Sources: Overview of the Supreme Court’s 2017-2018 Term. The Heritage Foundation Legal Memorandum No. 214 (9/5/2017); Here are the Major Questions Before the Supreme Court This Fall. The LA Times (9/20/2017). Supreme Court to decide on gerrymandering, religious liberty, with Justice Kennedy holding key votes. The LA Times (9/28/2017); Back at Full Strength, Supreme Court Faces a Momentous Term, New York Times (10/2/2017)