Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Fifth Circuit Dashes Delivery Driver’s Bid to Keep Wage Hour Claims Out of Arbitration

by Cathleen Bell Bremmer

In Edwards v. DoorDash, Inc., No. 17-20082 (5th Cir. Apr. 25, 2018), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed its position that arbitrability of claims, including whether class or collective claims must be arbitrated individually, is a threshold question that must be determined by the court prior to deciding certification motions. In Edwards, a driver asserted claims against a food-delivery service under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), asserting that he was improperly classified as an independent contractor and denied minimum wage and overtime pay required by the FLSA. Contemporaneously with the filing of his complaint, the driver filed a motion to conditionally certify a nationwide class of similarly situated delivery drivers.

The driver though had executed an independent contractor agreement with the company. That agreement contained an arbitration clause which was to serve as the “exclusive means of resolving disputes” between the company and the driver. The arbitration clause also contained a provision that any disputes in arbitration had to be brought “on an individual basis only and not as a class or other collective action basis.” The company moved to dismiss the case and compel individual arbitration of the driver’s claim, and the district judge granted the motion following an evidentiary hearing on the issues without deciding the conditional certification motion.

In its order upholding the district court’s order, the Fifth Circuit first reaffirmed a prior ruling in Reyna v. Int’l Bank of Commerce, 839 F.3d 373, 376 (5th Cir. 2016) that a decision on arbitrability of claims was required before a conditional certification ruling: “ … We continue to hold that arbitrability is a ‘threshold question’ to be determined ‘at the outset,’ a holding consistent with the ‘national policy favoring arbitration.’” The Edwards court went on to find that the arbitration agreement in question was valid and contained an enforceable delegation clause that appropriately delegated issues of arbitrability to the arbitrator.

Missing from the Edwards opinion was any discussion of the trio of cases pending before the United States Supreme Court on the issue of the validity of class or collective action waivers in individual arbitration cases, including the Fifth Circuit’s opinion in Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. NLRB, 808 F.3d 1013 (5th Cir. 2015). While Murphy Oil upheld the validity of class action waivers, certiorari was granted on Murphy Oil’s conflict with opinions in the Seventh and Ninth Circuits finding such waivers unenforceable. Issuance of the Edwards opinion in advance of the Supreme Court’s expected decision this term reinforces the Fifth Circuit’s apparent strong preference for arbitration of claims and enforcement of class and collective action waivers in employment disputes.

Edwards v. DoorDash, Inc., No. 17-20082 (5th Cir. Apr. 25, 2018).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

DC Court Weighs Whether Bristol-Myers Squibb Applies to Class Actions in Whole Foods Case

Next Article »

A Pyrrhic Victory For Petitioner: Ninth Circuit Limits Consolidation of Class Cases

About Cathleen Bell Bremmer

Katy Bremmer is of counsel at Carlton Fields in Tampa, Florida. Connect with Katy on LinkedIn.

Related Articles

  1. The Third Circuit Joins The Sixth And Holds That The Availability Of Class Arbitration Is A Substantive Question Of Arbitrability For Courts To Decide, Absent Clear Agreement Otherwise
  2. Eleventh Circuit Doesn’t Waffle on Enforceability of Arbitration Agreement
  3. Ninth Circuit Snubs Stolt-Nielsen, Holds Generic Employee Arbitration Agreement Permits Class-wide Arbitration

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

2025 Class Action Survey – Now Available!

DOWNLOAD NOW
Carlton Fields Logo A blog focused on the latest class action developments and trends by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Search

Topics

Industries/Practices
  • Construction
  • Consumer Finance & Banking
  • Food & Beverage
  • Health Care
  • Insurance
  • Labor, Employment & ERISA
  • Manufacturing & Products
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Privacy & Technology
  • Securities
  • Telecommunications

Substantive/Procedural
  • Arbitration
  • CAFA
  • Certification
    • Adequacy
    • Ascertainability
    • Commonality
    • Numerosity
    • Predominance
    • Superiority
    • Typicality
  • Decertification
  • Settlements
  • Standing
  • Striking of Class Allegations

Courts/Jurisdiction
  • Federal District Courts
  • Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
  • United States Supreme Court
  • State Courts

Monthly Archives

Recent Articles

  • Supreme Court Refuses to Decide Whether Damages Class Containing Both Injured and Uninjured Members Can Be Certified
  • Royal Canin v. Wullschleger: A Primer on Jurisdiction
  • Classified (Bi-)Monthly: A Roundup of Class Action Decisions From Federal Appellate Courts July and August 2024

Get Weekly Updates!

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • Class Action Survey

Related Industries/Practices

  • National Class Actions
  • National Trial Practice
  • Appellate & Trial Support
  • Our Class Action Experience

Classified®: The Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact

Copyright © 2025 · Carlton Fields · All Rights Reserved