Assaad v. American Nat'l Ins. Co

In Assaad v. American Nat'l Ins. Co. (N.D. Cal., Dec. 23, 2010, No. C 10-03712 WHA) 2010 WL 5416841, where an employment agreement required employees to request arbitration "within 30 days from the date of termination or other adverse employment action." (Id. at p. 7.) The court noted that 30 days was far shorter than the one-year statute of limitations provided by the Fair Employment and Housing Act, and it quoted with approval the decision of another court finding a 30-day statute of limitations unconscionable: "'If an aggrieved employee is uncertain whether he has a claim, it may take the employee more than thirty days to retain counsel and determine whether an act by the employer violated the employee's statutory rights. If an employee has a general sense that he has been wronged but lacks the sophistication to determine what legal claims he should bring, even if he complies with the thirty-day deadline to file a dispute in writing, he may fail to bring the correct claims during this internal resolution period and waive his right to assert meritorious claims later in the proceedings after obtaining counsel.' (McKinney v. Bonilla, No. 07cv2373, 2010 WL 2817179, at 9 (S.D.Cal. July 16, 2010).)" (Assaad, supra, at p. 7.) The court continued: "This analysis is persuasive. This thirty-day window 'functions as a trap for the unwary, limits the employee's ability to consult counsel, and appears to serve no legitimate purpose.' This provision imposes a vastly shortened statute of limitations and constitutes an unlawful attempt by employer to restrict its employees' rights." (Ibid.)