Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.

In July 2002, Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. and General Dynamics Corp. (collectively, Gulfstream) (defendants) adopted a written dispute-resolution policy (DRP) as the exclusive means of resolving employment-related disputes. Under the DRP, if a covered claim could not be resolved through internal reviews and mediation, arbitration was required. The DRP contained a list of covered claims, the time frame to submit a claim, dispute-resolution processes, and other terms. Gulfstream maintained the right to modify the DRP. Gulfstream mailed and electronically distributed the DRP to all employees. Per its terms, the DRP was deemed accepted by an employee’s continued employment. In March 2003, Gulfstream revised the DRP so that covered claims could no longer be brought as class actions. As before, the revised DRP was distributed to all employees, and continued employment constituted acceptance. Thereafter, individuals employed by Gulfstream between the summer of 2002 and spring of 2003 (the employees) (plaintiffs) filed two putative class actions alleging employment-related claims. Gulfstream filed motions to compel arbitration and dismiss the actions. The trial court entered an order granting Gulfstream’s motions. The employees appealed, arguing that the DRP was not a written agreement under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) because it was not signed by the parties.