PRIA Logo™
119-hr-10641119th CongressWALLET

Employee and Retiree Access to Justice Act

Sponsored By: Representative DeSaulnier, Mark [D-CA-10]

Introduced

Summary

Bans mandatory predispute arbitration and other forced waivers for disputes over employee benefits. This bill would amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to make most predispute arbitration clauses unenforceable and to tightly limit when postdispute arbitration or waivers are allowed.

Show full summary
  • Participants and beneficiaries would be able to bring ERISA claims or related common-law claims to court instead of being forced into predispute arbitration. Postdispute arbitration would only stand if the participant gave written consent after a notice and a waiting period of at least 45 days.
  • Employers, plan sponsors, plans, and plan service providers could not require predispute arbitration as a condition of participation or benefits. Plans other than multiemployer plans could not give administrators discretionary authority or require non-de novo court review for benefit decisions.
  • Courts, not arbitrators, would decide whether an arbitration provision is valid. The Secretary of Labor could write rules on notices and implementation.
  • The changes would take effect on enactment and apply to disputes arising on or after that date, with a 1-year window before plan-document updates are enforced.

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to download

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

3 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 1 mixed.

Stop forced arbitration for workers

This bill would generally make any predispute arbitration clause about ERISA plan benefits invalid. A postdispute arbitration could be enforced only if it was voluntary, not coerced or required, you got a paper notice in plain language telling you you could refuse without retaliation, you waited at least 45 days after getting the final text and disclosures, and you gave written consent. Courts, not arbitrators, would decide whether an arbitration rule is valid. The rule would not apply when the Secretary finds the term came from bona fide collective bargaining and would take effect on the date of enactment.

Ban plan discretionary benefit rules

This bill would make unenforceable plan terms (for plans that are not multiemployer plans) that give the plan special discretionary power to decide benefits or interpret plan language. Courts would have to apply de novo review instead of a deferential standard when reviewing benefit decisions for those plans. The change would take effect on the date of enactment.

Timing and one-year plan safe-harbor

This bill would make the changes effective on the date of enactment and apply to any dispute or claim that arises or accrues on or after that date, even if older plan papers say something else. At the same time, a person would not be treated as violating the new rules solely because plan documents have not been updated until after the first plan year that begins on or after the date that is 1 year after enactment, as long as the person follows the new rules while documents are still being updated. The Secretary of Labor could issue regulations to implement these timing and notice rules.

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

DeSaulnier, Mark [D-CA-10]

CA • D

Cosponsors

  • Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA-3]

    VA • D

    Sponsored 10/1/2026

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov
Back to Legislation