Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon
Argued March 28, 2022
Full case nameSouthwest Airlines Co. v. Latrice Saxon
Docket no.21-309
Questions presented
Whether workers who load or unload goods from vehicles that travel in interstate commerce, but do not physically transport such goods themselves, are interstate "transportation workers" exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act.
Court membership
Chief Justice
That date is in the future. Check DecideDate/Year then ArgueDate/Year!
Associate Justices
Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon (Docket 21–309) is a pending United States Supreme Court case related to the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Background[]

Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1, exempts "contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce" from its scope. In its 2001 Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held the residual clause of Section 1 applies only to "transportation workers."

Latrice Saxon was a ramp supervisor for Southwest Airlines who directed the loading and unloading of cargo from the airline's flights. Saxon filed a lawsuit under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 disputing Southwest's handling of overtime pay for ramp supervisors. The airline invoked an arbitration clause in Saxon's employment contract, and the district court dismissed her suit on that basis, finding that the Federal Arbitration Act did apply to her contract. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed, holding Saxon was a transportation worker and her job involved her working in interstate commerce. Southwest filed a petition for a writ of certiorari.[1]

Supreme Court[]

Certiorari was granted in the case on December 10, 2021.

References[]

  1. ^ Howe, Amy (December 10, 2021). "Justices agree to take up new cases on arbitration issues and international child custody". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved December 18, 2021.
Retrieved from ""