Today, I want to talk about something that really grinds my gears and that you as a potential employment law plaintiff should be very wary of – contractually shortened statutes of limitations. Unless you are an avid reader of this blog, you may be unaware that employment claims are already subject to one of the shorter statutes of limitations (or timeframes within which you must bring suit to not get your claims thrown out) of any type of claim. Compare the following:
- Recovery of real estate, 21 years, R.C. 2305.04;
- Breach of oil and gas lease: either 4 years if in regard to the calculation of royalty payments (in accord with R.C. 1302.98) or 6 years for anything else, based on the below statute for contacts in writing. R.C. 2305.041.
- Contracts in writing, 6 years (and was 8 within my professional memory), R.C. 2305.06;
- Contracts not in writing (“We verbally agreed that he would do X”), 4 years, R.C. 2305.07;
- Torts such as trespass to real property, theft of personal property, or fraud, 4 years, R.C. 2305.09;
- Legal malpractice, 1 year, C. 2305.117 (neener neener);
…to employment law claims, most of which max out at a 2 year statute of limitations in Ohio, but which can be as short as 300, 180, or 90 days, or for some OSHA claims, even less.
What this means in practice is that if someone breached your oil and gas lease, go ahead and take your time bringing suit – you’ve got time to spare. On the other hand, if you believe you have potential employment law claims, run, don’t walk, to Spitz, the Employee’s Law Firm – time is wasting.
Nevertheless, that isn’t the whole story. Some employers think that <1 to 2 years is too generous, and that you should be in court within a mere 180 days. (The fact that it can take that long merely to “exhaust your administrative remedies” if you are bringing EEOC charges, or if the OCRC is just swamped flies over their heads). Unfortunately, in many cases, the law agrees with them.
As Ohio employment lawyers, we are most intimately familiar with the 2+ (claims are tolled while they are pending in the OCRC, and the clock only starts ticking again once a right to sue is issued – R.C. 4112.052) year statute of limitations for filing cases based on Ohio state law claims. We are also well acquainted with the 180-300 day statute of limitation to file federal claims with the EEOC, and the 90 day scramble to file suit once they issue us a right to sue. However, it is admittedly harder to keep up with the wide number of companies that impose shorter statute of limitations based on small print adhesion contracts entered into while an employee is signing a swarm of other documents during their application and onboarding processes – often years prior to the employer’s adverse, harassing, and/or discriminatory conduct. This can put many people at a disadvantage.
Unfortunately, Ohio law doesn’t care. As summarized in Fayak v. Univ. Hosps., 2020-Ohio-5512, ¶ 21 (8th Dist.), “Ohio courts have applied shortened contractual limitations periods to employment discrimination claims […] we find that the six-month limitations period […] is reasonable and enforceable under Ohio law.” That means that you could be subject to such as statute of limitation, and not know it – and that you won’t know it until both parties have engaged attorneys and started negotiations. Again, if you think you may have an employment claim, grab your phone, put your petal to the metal, and reach out for a free evaluation of your claims by a Spitz attorney!
But what if my claim is older than 6 months? Sometimes things happen. Job loss can be a very stressful event. Moreover, many people’s first priority upon their termination is to get another job, not seek damages from the old one (and with the legal duty to mitigate, this is a reasonable first priority to have). I do have some glimmers of light to pass along.
First, not all employers rely upon such contractual limitations. The vast majority of cases I see are not subject to such underhanded employer tactics, and you can rely on the statutes of limitations Congress or the Ohio General Assembly intended you to have.
Second, even where contractual limitations apply, there are some exceptions. In Logan v. MGM Grand Detroit Casino, 939 F.3d 824, 830 (6th Cir. 2019) the Sixth Circuit (which holds appellate jurisdiction over federal law claims brought in Ohio) held that claims brought under Title VII (a federal law which prohibits race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation), or national origin discrimination) cannot be subjected to a contractually-shortened statute of limitations, save in cases where arbitration is mandated.
Likewise, claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (such as minimum wage and overtime claims) also cannot be subjected to a shortened statute of limitations. Id citing Boaz v. FedEx Customer Information Services, Inc., 725 F.3d 603 (6th Cir. 2013). The same goes for claims of disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and for age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). Thompson v. Fresh Products, LLC, 985 F.3d 509, 521 (6th Cir. 2021).
Even in some cases subject to both a contractually shortened statute of limitations and mandatory arbitration, all is not lost. While arbitration is highly favored under federal law, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (“EFAA”) does allow an employee/plaintiff to avoid it in cases of sexual assault or harassment. Moreover, the EFAA covers any claim that “relates to the sexual assault dispute or the sexual harassment dispute” so in cases where someone has suffered both sexual assault/harassment and some other form of discrimination, those claims can also escape arbitration –thus falling back into the protections set forth in Logan.
What does all this mean to you? What can you do with your specific legal situation? There is no better way to find out than to contact Spitz, the Employee’s Law Firm at 866-797-6040 for a free consultation and let us figure it out for you. We’re looking forward to your call.
Disclaimer
This employment lawyer’s blog is for general informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal advice regarding any of the topics discussed therein, or anything at all. If you are experiencing discrimination, a hostile work environment, retaliation, or suffered wrongful termination based any protected class status or protected activities you have undertaken, consult a qualified employment lawyer in your jurisdiction (if that’s us, we’ll be happy to have you!). No guarantees are made, and past outcomes do not predict future results. This blog is a legal advertisement and does not create an attorney-client relationship.