5 ms·

It's sad to see the law moving further and further in favor of corporations either way, though I'm very much not a lawyer and, even after reading all this, can'

It's sad to see the law moving further and further in favor of corporations either way, though I'm very much not a lawyer and, even after reading all this, can't tell if this is as bad as it sounds.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
xxpor 6y ago
This is more or less the entire purpose of the Federalist Society's existence.
- rmrfstar 6y ago
  Yup. FedSoc is the political arm of the law and economics movement.
henryfjordan 6y ago
It's not super bad. A FB worker was suing for overtime money. She had the right under the FLSA to force FB to notify her coworkers that they might want to join her suit. FB argued that half of her coworkers were covered by arbitration agreements and they shouldn't have to give that half notice of the lawsuit. The appeals court agreed, ever so slightly eroding the rights of workers.
- Avicebron 6y ago
  >"ever so slightly eroding the rights of workers" >"it's not super bad" I disagree, but maybe there is a crowd out there that agrees workers shouldn't have rights?
  - FriendlyNormie 6y ago
    Be careful, antisemitic remarks are not allowed on HN.
- thelittleone 6y ago
  "slightly eroding the rights of workers". Seems bad enough to me. How often are the rights of mega corporations slightly eroded? And how do those erosions hold under the weight of appeals by megacorps lawyer hordes and lobbyists?
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    The rights of mega corporations get eroded very frequently. I think even anti-corporate activists will admit to that. Their concern, generally, is that corporate rights should be not eroded through gradual tiny reforms but blown away completely.
    - thelittleone 6y ago
      Fair point. Intuitively though it seems the net of mega corps erosion of rights vs accretion of rights is firmly in their favor.
    - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
      The rights of mega corporations to exploit particular things is eroded frequently by regulation, however the size and power of mega corporations are such that they can devote considerable effort to finding new things to exploit that have not been effectively regulated yet. They can of course also devote resources to stop regulation of their favorite areas of exploitability.
      - vimax 6y ago
        Also, the large corporations have the lobbying money to influence regulation. Once their behavior is egregious enough to warrant regulation, they able to twist it to be a barrier to entry for new players further entrenching their own position.
missedthecue 6y ago
>It's sad to see the law moving further and further in favor of corporations either way Are they? Or are companies just becoming more careful when it comes to the letter of the law?
- xxpor 6y ago
  The law is changing to accommodate them to make whatever they're doing the letter of the law.
  - missedthecue 6y ago
    can you give me a contemporary example?
    - rmrfstar 6y ago
      The recent trend is about atomizing plaintiffs. Not many people have the financial resources to bring a case on their own, and lawyers tend not to bring contingency fee cases for a single plaintiff without multi-million dollar damages. Here are some recent cases: AT&T Mobility v. Conception (2011): Class actions are not an exception to the FAA. That means companies get to fight 1000 little guys individually instead of fighting them as a group. American Express v. Italian Colors (2013): You have to arbitrate on your own even if the harm is so small that individual arbitration is not economically viable. In other words, you can’t sue unless you have >=$100k for a lawyer or multi-million dollar damages. Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis (2018): You have to arbitrate on your own even if the harm was interference with your right to concerted activity. In other words, if you are harmed while trying to organize as a group you have to defend yourself on your own. Arbitration is a Kangaroo court. Large companies are repeat players, and "the little guy" plays once. It is ugly, undemocratic, and wrong. Even the Federal government is trying to force people into arbitration [1]. [1] https://www.citizen.org/article/forced-arbitration-wall-of-shame/ https://www.citizen.org/article/forced-arbitration-wall-of-s...
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]

It's sad to see the law moving further and further in favor of corporations either way, though I'm very much not a lawyer and, even after reading all this, can't tell if this is as bad as it sounds.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

xxpor 6y ago

This is more or less the entire purpose of the Federalist Society's existence.

rmrfstar 6y ago
Yup. FedSoc is the political arm of the law and economics movement.

henryfjordan 6y ago

It's not super bad. A FB worker was suing for overtime money. She had the right under the FLSA to force FB to notify her coworkers that they might want to join her suit. FB argued that half of her coworkers were covered by arbitration agreements and they shouldn't have to give that half notice of the lawsuit. The appeals court agreed, ever so slightly eroding the rights of workers.

Avicebron 6y ago
>"ever so slightly eroding the rights of workers" >"it's not super bad" I disagree, but maybe there is a crowd out there that agrees workers shouldn't have rights?
- FriendlyNormie 6y ago
  Be careful, antisemitic remarks are not allowed on HN.
thelittleone 6y ago
"slightly eroding the rights of workers". Seems bad enough to me. How often are the rights of mega corporations slightly eroded? And how do those erosions hold under the weight of appeals by megacorps lawyer hordes and lobbyists?
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  The rights of mega corporations get eroded very frequently. I think even anti-corporate activists will admit to that. Their concern, generally, is that corporate rights should be not eroded through gradual tiny reforms but blown away completely.
  - thelittleone 6y ago
    Fair point. Intuitively though it seems the net of mega corps erosion of rights vs accretion of rights is firmly in their favor.
  - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
    The rights of mega corporations to exploit particular things is eroded frequently by regulation, however the size and power of mega corporations are such that they can devote considerable effort to finding new things to exploit that have not been effectively regulated yet. They can of course also devote resources to stop regulation of their favorite areas of exploitability.
    - vimax 6y ago
      Also, the large corporations have the lobbying money to influence regulation. Once their behavior is egregious enough to warrant regulation, they able to twist it to be a barrier to entry for new players further entrenching their own position.

missedthecue 6y ago

>It's sad to see the law moving further and further in favor of corporations either way Are they? Or are companies just becoming more careful when it comes to the letter of the law?

xxpor 6y ago
The law is changing to accommodate them to make whatever they're doing the letter of the law.
- missedthecue 6y ago
  can you give me a contemporary example?
  - rmrfstar 6y ago
    The recent trend is about atomizing plaintiffs. Not many people have the financial resources to bring a case on their own, and lawyers tend not to bring contingency fee cases for a single plaintiff without multi-million dollar damages. Here are some recent cases: AT&T Mobility v. Conception (2011): Class actions are not an exception to the FAA. That means companies get to fight 1000 little guys individually instead of fighting them as a group. American Express v. Italian Colors (2013): You have to arbitrate on your own even if the harm is so small that individual arbitration is not economically viable. In other words, you can’t sue unless you have >=$100k for a lawyer or multi-million dollar damages. Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis (2018): You have to arbitrate on your own even if the harm was interference with your right to concerted activity. In other words, if you are harmed while trying to organize as a group you have to defend yourself on your own. Arbitration is a Kangaroo court. Large companies are repeat players, and "the little guy" plays once. It is ugly, undemocratic, and wrong. Even the Federal government is trying to force people into arbitration [1]. [1] https://www.citizen.org/article/forced-arbitration-wall-of-shame/ https://www.citizen.org/article/forced-arbitration-wall-of-s...
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]