U.S. Markets open in 7 hrs 46 mins

Pa. Judge Sends Sexual Harassment Claims Against Pfizer to Arbitration


Pifzer. Photo: Shutterstock.com.

A federal judge has ruled that a sexual harassment dispute between an assembly line worker and pharmaceutical giant Pfizer must be resolved through arbitration.

U.S. District Judge Sylvia H. Rambo of the Middle District of Pennsylvania granted Pfizer's motion to compel arbitration in plaintiff Jenna Keller's lawsuit.

The issue centered on whether the parties were bound to a valid arbitration agreement, an area of legal subject matter that Rambo noted has been increasingly disputed.

"The enforceability of arbitration clauses and their scope have been among the most frequently litigated issues before the Supreme Court in recent years, particularly in the context of employment disputes," Rambo said.

In Keller's case, Pfizer argued that Keller purposefully agreed to arbitration when she was hired and by completing the mandatory arbitration training electronically and acknowledging the arbitration agreement it contained.

Keller argued that she should not be bound by the arbitration agreement because she doesn't recall entering into the agreement, did not sign a paper version of the agreement and is not familiar with the concept of arbitration.

"Plaintiff’s argument that she should not be bound by the arbitration agreement simply because she did not sign a physical paper contract is as archaic today as the notion that James Joyce is unlawfully obscene," Rambo said referring to the 1934 U.S. Supreme Court case over the novel "Ulysses."

"In the specific context of assent to arbitration clauses, courts have found such intent where a plaintiff agreed in a digital format that did not require a signature, electronic or otherwise," Rambo said, adding, "Moreover, courts have unwaveringly held that continued job performance is a valid method of accepting an agreement to arbitrate in lieu of a signature."

Additionally, Rambo said employees agree to changes in employment conditions by way of continuing to work at a given company. Having determined that, the analysis turned on whether Keller was given sufficient notice.

"Plaintiff does not deny that she received the relevant agreements or did not agree to them; instead, she merely states that she is not familiar with them and cannot recall their specific contents," Rambo said. "If plaintiff’s logic were sufficient to defeat evidence of a contractual agreement, any party could escape enforcement simply by stating that they forgot the terms of a contract or could not recall signing the document. Defendant has offered tangible evidence that shows that plaintiff received, read, and affirmatively agreed to the company’s standard arbitration agreement, and plaintiff has offered no evidence that would invalidate or contradict defendant’s evidence."

The attorneys for the parties, Graham Baird of the Law Offices of Eric A. Shore for Keller, and John Nolan of Jackson Lewis for Pfizer, did not respond to requests for comment.