Key facts
- A federal judge ordered 44 former Fannie Mae employees to arbitration.
- The employees alleged discriminatory firing based on national origin, language, and age.
- The lawsuit claimed the terminations were linked to Fannie Mae's Charitable Giving program.
- Fannie Mae argued the employees were bound by a 2015 arbitration agreement update.
- The judge found no factual dispute regarding the agreement to arbitrate.
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by 44 former Fannie Mae employees who alleged discriminatory firing, ordering their claims to arbitration. Judge Randolph D. Moss ruled that the plaintiffs failed to provide evidence of a dispute over whether they had agreed to arbitrate employment-related issues.
The employees, primarily of Indian national origin and Telugu speakers, and mostly over 50, claimed they were terminated for cause related to the company's Charitable Giving program. They argued this mass termination was discriminatory and violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Fannie Mae moved to compel arbitration, asserting that all employees were subject to an updated arbitration agreement from 2015. The company provided evidence, including email records and electronic confirmations, showing employees were notified of the updated agreement and that continued employment signified acceptance. Some plaintiffs had also signed transfer offer letters that reaffirmed their agreement to arbitration.
The plaintiffs opposed the motion, arguing a lack of mutual agreement on arbitration and requesting an evidentiary hearing. However, Judge Moss rejected this request, stating the plaintiffs had not presented sufficient evidence to dispute the arbitrability of their claims. The ruling means the former employees must pursue their claims through arbitration rather than federal court.