3 ms·

I don't think it should be legal to be able to surrender the ability to pursue legal action outside of very specific waivers. I'm fine with companies incentivi

by munk-a 3y ago

I don't think it should be legal to be able to surrender the ability to pursue legal action outside of very specific waivers. I'm fine with companies incentivizing arbitration but if a company is able to fully block regular legal actions (especially class action lawsuits) then that smells bad.

nine_k 3y ago
But the wavers are rather specific, and in all cases I encountered, there are some exceptions for serious cases which the law does not allow to relegate to arbitration. I suppose that arbitration lowers the cost of a dispute very seriously. It makes sorting out small issues affordable and much faster. I see it as a good tradeoff as long as I don't depend on it in potentially serious cases, where hiring a lawyer would be the least of my troubles.
- munk-a 3y ago
  Uber's[1] is usually held up as a prime example of these agreements - and reading through it the only carve out they allow seems to be for sexual assault[2]. IANAL but to my reading the only other carve out is when binding arbitration would be illegal. It also seems to preempt any ability to bring pretty much any kind of class action lawsuit. 1. https://www.uber.com/legal/en/document/?name=uber-connect-terms-and-conditions&country=united-states&lang=en https://www.uber.com/legal/en/document/?name=uber-connect-te... 2. "Notwithstanding the foregoing, where you allege claims of sexual assault or sexual harassment[...]"
bee_rider 3y ago
Yes, we often look at it from a personal choice point of view: I can evaluate the contract and decide that I’d like to waive this right. But the law exists to protect everyone, and part of that is it imposes a little bit on everyone. If a basically every company insists that you waive your employee rights to work for them, then the only people with those rights are the unemployed, rendering those laws a bit moot. You gain a competitive advantage over your peers by being willing to waive your rights, in the sense that a company of course would like to not have to respect your rights. The point of employee protection laws is to take that off the table.
vorpalhex 3y ago
My preference here, if I had a magical "change the world wand", would be to allow arbitration to be binding only B2B and not between a business and a consumer. A consumer should always be able to resort to the courts proper.

by munk-a 3y ago

nine_k 3y ago

But the wavers are rather specific, and in all cases I encountered, there are some exceptions for serious cases which the law does not allow to relegate to arbitration. I suppose that arbitration lowers the cost of a dispute very seriously. It makes sorting out small issues affordable and much faster. I see it as a good tradeoff as long as I don't depend on it in potentially serious cases, where hiring a lawyer would be the least of my troubles.

munk-a 3y ago
Uber's[1] is usually held up as a prime example of these agreements - and reading through it the only carve out they allow seems to be for sexual assault[2]. IANAL but to my reading the only other carve out is when binding arbitration would be illegal. It also seems to preempt any ability to bring pretty much any kind of class action lawsuit. 1. https://www.uber.com/legal/en/document/?name=uber-connect-terms-and-conditions&country=united-states&lang=en https://www.uber.com/legal/en/document/?name=uber-connect-te... 2. "Notwithstanding the foregoing, where you allege claims of sexual assault or sexual harassment[...]"

bee_rider 3y ago

Yes, we often look at it from a personal choice point of view: I can evaluate the contract and decide that I’d like to waive this right. But the law exists to protect everyone, and part of that is it imposes a little bit on everyone. If a basically every company insists that you waive your employee rights to work for them, then the only people with those rights are the unemployed, rendering those laws a bit moot. You gain a competitive advantage over your peers by being willing to waive your rights, in the sense that a company of course would like to not have to respect your rights. The point of employee protection laws is to take that off the table.

vorpalhex 3y ago

My preference here, if I had a magical "change the world wand", would be to allow arbitration to be binding only B2B and not between a business and a consumer. A consumer should always be able to resort to the courts proper.