top of page
Search

Nonsignatory Compels Arbitrtion

Sep 18, 2025
1 min read

Arbitration agreements are typically understood to bind only the parties who sign them. However, a recent case, Ford v ConocoPhillips, highlights where a company can compel arbitration even if they didn't directly sign an individual's employment contract.


Shawn Michael Ford sued ConocoPhillips for alleged Fair Labor Standards Act violations. Ford's direct agreement, known as the Master Consulting Agreement (MCA), was with Bedrock PC, a consulting firm that contracted him out to ConocoPhillips. ConocoPhillips itself was not a signatory to Ford's MCA. Despite this, ConocoPhillips successfully moved to compel arbitration.


The key was that Ford's MCA with Bedrock PC plainly referred to and expressly incorporated by reference the Master Agreement for Support Services (MSA) between ConocoPhillips and Bedrock PC.  Ford's MCA explicitly stated that if he were "hired by Company" (referring to ConocoPhillips), he "agrees to the provisions of the MSA as Bedrock’s contractor".


By signing his MCA, Ford assumed the obligations and responsibilities that Bedrock PC undertook toward ConocoPhillips, as set forth in the ConocoPhillips MSA. Since the ConocoPhillips MSA included a mandatory arbitration provision covering claims like those under the FLSA, Ford was thereby bound to arbitrate his claims against ConocoPhillips, a nonsignatory to his original MCA. This demonstrates how interconnected contracts can extend arbitration obligations beyond direct signatories.

 

Shawn Michael Ford v ConocoPhillips, No 22020334 (5th Cir September 9, 2025)(not designated for publication).

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Arbitration Waiver

High Stakes of Arbitration Timing The Seventh Circuit’s decision in George Moore v. Club Exploria, LLC. No. 25-2721 (7th Cir., August 18, 2026) serves as a stark warning: the delay of this motion is n

 
 
 
Unopened Emails. No Agreement to Arbitrate.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the Southern District of California’s denial of Thermo Fisher Scientific’s motion to compel arbitration in Rickes v. Thermo Fisher Sci

 
 
 

Comments


Contact
Information

214-747-2012

Mailing Address: 3883 Les Lacs Ave, Addison, Texas 75001

Office address: 14555 Dallas Pkwy Ste 100, Dallas, Texas 75254

©2023 by Daniel Tenant. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page