Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon
596 U. S. ____ (2022) (2022)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Workers who physically load and unload cargo onto vehicles of interstate transportation are a 'class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce' under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, even if they do not physically travel across state lines with the goods.
Facts:
- Latrice Saxon was employed by Southwest Airlines as a ramp supervisor at Chicago Midway International Airport.
- Southwest Airlines transports passengers and cargo to domestic and international destinations.
- Saxon's duties included training and supervising teams of ramp agents who physically loaded and unloaded baggage, airmail, and commercial cargo onto airplanes.
- Saxon also frequently and personally participated in loading and unloading cargo onto airplanes that traveled across the country.
Procedural Posture:
- Latrice Saxon filed a putative class action lawsuit against Southwest Airlines in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
- Southwest moved to dismiss the lawsuit and compel individual arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), based on an arbitration clause in Saxon's employment contract.
- Saxon argued that she was exempt from the FAA's coverage under the §1 exemption for transportation workers.
- The District Court granted Southwest's motion, holding that the exemption applied only to those involved in 'actual transportation' and not those who merely handle goods.
- Saxon (as appellant) appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, with Southwest as the appellee.
- The Seventh Circuit reversed, holding that the act of loading cargo onto a vehicle for interstate transport is itself commerce, thereby placing Saxon within the §1 exemption.
- Southwest Airlines petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which was granted.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, which exempts contracts of 'seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce,' apply to an airline ramp supervisor who frequently loads and unloads cargo onto planes that travel in interstate commerce?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Thomas
Yes. A worker who frequently loads and unloads cargo on and off airplanes that travel in interstate commerce belongs to a 'class of workers engaged in... interstate commerce' and is therefore exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act's coverage. The Court determines the relevant 'class of workers' by looking at the actual work they perform, not the industry of their employer. Thus, Saxon belongs to the class of 'airplane cargo loaders.' The phrase 'engaged in commerce' means being directly involved in the transportation of goods across state or international borders. Citing precedent, the Court reasoned that loading and unloading an interstate shipment is so closely related to interstate transportation as to be 'practically a part of it.' A worker does not need to physically accompany the goods across state lines to be considered a transportation worker under §1; they must simply play a direct and necessary role in the free flow of goods across borders.
Analysis:
This unanimous decision clarifies and potentially broadens the scope of the FAA's §1 'transportation worker' exemption. It solidifies that the exemption analysis focuses on the character of the work performed, not the employer's industry or whether the worker physically crosses state lines. This holding has significant implications for workers in the logistics and transportation industries, including 'last-mile' delivery drivers and warehouse workers, making it more likely they can avoid mandatory arbitration and pursue class-action lawsuits in court. The ruling tempers the FAA's strong 'proarbitration' policy by giving full effect to the plain text of the §1 exemption.
