Customer Relations Manager of Carrier Is Not Transportion Worker Under the Federal Arbitration Act

In a decision issued today (July 1, 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a In a decision issued today (July 1, 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a customer service worker employed by a motor carrier was not a transportation worker exempted from the Federal Arbitration Act. In McNamara v. Yellow Transportation, Ronald McNamara brought suit against Yellow for retaliation, sex discrimination and violation of the Family Medical Leave Act. McNamara had signed an arbitration agreement with Yellow more than 8 years after it hired him, According to McNamara, a Customer Relations Manager, complained to Yellow that his manager harassed people in the office and showed favoritism to women. McNamara claimed he was fired for these complaints. Yellow claimed it fired him for disregarding Yellow's work rules.

McNamara brought his claim with the EEOC, but Yellow did not seek arbitration during the proceedings before EEOC. After McNamara brought suit Yellow moved for summary judgment or , in the alternative, for an order directing arbitration.

The Court of Appeals addressed whether McNamara could be compelled to arbitrate by virtue of his execution of the arbitration agreement. McNamara claimed he was an exempt employee because the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply to "contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce."

In deciding that McNamara was not a transportation worker (and consequently not exempt from the FAA), the Court found that it was bound by its previous decision in Lenz v. Yellow Transportation, 431 F.3d 348 (8th Cir. 2005) wherein it had held that a customer service worker who worked at a call center was not a transportation worker within the meaning of the FAA. The
Court noted that the Supreme Court has interpreted the FAA exemption for transportation workers very narrowly and limited to "those workers actually engaged in the movement of goods in interstate commerce."

The Court also held that Yellow did not waive its right to arbitrate by failing to move for arbitration during the EEOC proceedings prior to McNamara's commencement of suit.

Here is a link to the Court's decision:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/082654p.pdf.