3 ms·
> it's faster and more efficient than the judicial system Only in theory, or maybe if you take averages. As soon as you give people rights (to see the evidence
by Cupertino95014 5y ago
> it's faster and more efficient than the judicial system
Only in theory, or maybe if you take averages. As soon as you give people rights (to see the evidence against them, to confront witnesses, etc.) you have to create processes to manage those rights, and it ends up resembling the judicial system.
I had a friend go through a wrongful termination arbitration, and it took two years. Lawyers were present on both sides; the larger party could (and did) stretch out the process so as to bankrupt the smaller one; settlement negotiations were interminable. It's not clear to me that a court case would have been appreciably longer.
- UIUC_06 5y agoI've heard the same stories. People imagine "arbitration" is like Judge Judy: you both tell your side, and then she issues a ruling. Badda bing, badda boom. NOT! You have to get a lawyer, and it drags on and on.