The rule of (contract) law is essential for a function economic system in society.
Justice Kennedy decides the law again. He is the law.
What they did not "back," and the minority did, was the right of rich Democrat class action lawyers to fleece millions out of employers while giving "crumbs" to the worker/plaintiffs.
Been firing liberals since 2008. See tagline. 4 of them tried. Then we sued these clowns just for fun when they lost. I hate liberals.
Never mind that most corporate CEOs went to the same colleges, drank the same Kool-Aid, and require their employees to sign virtually identical contracts.
So really you can't just choose to work for some other company, but then why would you want to work for someone else and be a wage slave loser?
Everyone should start his/her own company and work for him/herself. Otherwise they're losers.
Of course you may not get the major corporations to subcontract out to your company if you don't have the appropriate sexual harassment, diversity, affirmative hiring, etc. practices. And if you don't want to do all the work yourself you'll have to hire losers who want to be your wage slaves.
Moral of the story: Lawyers eff things up.
Is this about severance pay being held hostage to NDA's and no future litigation over H-1B or other worker discrimination actions?
Generally speaking, a "paycheck" in its common use is in exchange for services rendered. "Severance" is supplemental pay to compensate a long-term employee for sudden loss of income, usually to cover household expenses until other employment can be obtained.
Linking severance pay with waiving of rights is a de facto signing a contract under duress. If the issue is that workers signed the contracts under duress and now have regrets, then you might get away with saying that a contract is a contract.
For the workers who did not sign the contract but still demand to sue for severance, that's another matter entirely as there is no underlying contract.
-PJ
Wait till someone writes a contract that makes the employee agree to binding arbitration in sexual harassment or race discrimination cases.
That should tie our entire Federal Court system in knots for the next thirteen years.
Class actions only enrich the lawyers, one BOTH SIDES. Companies pay millions and millions to defend and the plaintiff lawyers get all the legal fees from the verdict or settlement. Wronged employees, if there were even wronged in the first place, get coupons a few bucks.
Arbitration boards can be stacked in favor of a big client.
Class-Action suits, on the other hand, are almost always corrupt and a vehicle for lawyer enrichment or liberal policy promotion, or both.
Supreme Court sides with employers in class action arbitration cases
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/politics/supreme-court-nlra-arbitration-gorsuch/index.html
What that's... that's just... CRAZY talk!
;-)