3 ms·
In Arbitration, a ‘Privatization of the Justice System’
- Moshe_Silnorin 11y agoWhat would be David Friedman's solution to this? Arbitration, itself, doesn't seem to be the issue, only the crooked nature of its currant incentives. Some automated law firm that represents customers and employers, which reads and and signs contracts in the customers' and employers' stead may work. I find private law interesting, but it strikes me that such a thing would be hard to bootstrap. Perhaps if the service didn't have any fee and worked purely off of commission, as minimizing the pain of signing up seems key.
- lumberjack 11y agoIf a private arbitration court was not biased towards the employer, then what would be the point of its existence? Why would the employer prefer it over a public court?
- arca_vorago 11y ago"Arbitration, itself, doesn't seem to be the issue, only the crooked nature of its currant incentives." I'm curious how you have come to this conclusion, because your first statement seems wrong at face value to me, in that as a basic principle of at least American ideology, Justice is a public affair in that public officials held to a higher standard should preside. I don't think the private arbitration should be outlawed, but I certainly think the full ramifications and explanation of the jurisdictional issues would be explained to those participating. My question would be about the opposite: are there any situations where someone who disagrees with private courts like this gets forced into using that system? How does the move from civil to private work, or do cases like this never touch the civil court and go straight there? In that case, it seems like a lack of backbone from the party to say "no, I'm taking this to civil court".