4 ms·
> The ruling, awarded without proper notice by an emergency arbitrator (a non-court mediator that is part of the American Arbitration Association), actually sai
by ceejayoz 7mo ago
> The ruling, awarded without proper notice by an emergency arbitrator (a non-court mediator that is part of the American Arbitration Association), actually said nothing about the truth or otherwise of Sarah’s devastating claims in her book. It made no mention of defamation. Instead, it relied on a non-disparagement clause in her severance agreement with Facebook to silence her.
It's well past time to rein in arbitration.
It really should be treated like small claims court; only permissible up to a point. Once it's high-stakes enough, real courts should be in play.
- vr46 7mo agoPublic interest argument is strong here
- Invictus0 7mo agoshe agreed to it to get a severance payment
- ceejayoz 7mo agoThat should be illegal, too. Or the permissible scope of such an agreement heavily limited.
- thejazzman 7mo ago“Sign this or starve” isn’t much of a stretch when you think about it
- 0x3f 7mo agoAs if Meta employees live on the cusp of starving.
- ceejayoz 7mo agohttps://www.npr.org/2020/05/12/854998616/in-settlement-facebook-to-pay-52-million-to-content-moderators-with-ptsd https://www.npr.org/2020/05/12/854998616/in-settlement-faceb... > Some of the content moderators were earning $28,800 a year, the technology news site The Verge found last year. In this particular case, the legal costs are probably pretty ruinous.
- 0x3f 7mo agoI think you'll find the person in question's title is quite far from content moderator.
- ceejayoz 7mo agoI think you'll find that's why the "in this particular case" line is there.
- 0x3f 7mo agoNobody forced her to break her contract and thus come up against that. She would have been perfectly fine on the leftovers from ~$500k/y while searching for her next job. The parent makes out like she simply had to get the extra money, lest she starve to death. Which is patently ridiculous.
- thejazzman 7mo agoI agree with you there, but I think that may be the only reason this app isn’t cast in a darker light. I can also imagine that with SF living expenses that there are a lot of people without a big safety net I don’t really mean for this to be related to any one person. The general population doesn’t have a choice but to sign terms and get the severance , in general, in America
- burnt-resistor 7mo agoIt's called a Hobson's choice.
- 0x3f 7mo ago[flagged]
- ceejayoz 7mo ago"Yes, sometimes." — the law (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/unconscionability https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/unconscionability)
- 0x3f 7mo ago[flagged]
- ceejayoz 7mo agoIt's Hacker News, not I'm Thirteen And Just Discovered Anarchism And It Sounds Cool Because Now My Parents Can't Tell Me To Brush My Teeth Before Bed News.
- ppseafield 7mo agoShe had serious debilitating medical issues from pregnancy where she lost a ton of blood and was in a coma for several days and nearly died. Of course she's going to take her severance to help care for her family given the atrocious state of our healthcare system.
- indymike 7mo agoI hate seeing this down-voted. It is such an important warning to people here. Severance agreements are pretty strong. Also, be very careful of snap settlement offers. So many of the greatest tragedies I've seen inflicted on people come from accepting an expedient way to get what is really a small amount of money quickly. So often the drive is paying the rent/mortgage or fear of losing health benefits. If you are in a bad situation and offered a settlement and you really feel like something isn't right please talk to an employment lawyer. Most US States have expedited processes for quickly resolving these cases, and the lawyer can help you a lot when you feel like your only choice is to take the severance.
- pants2 7mo agoSo what happens if the author ignores this judgement? Surely arbitration can't send someone to prison. According to the web they still need a court to even confirm a monetary penalty.
- ceejayoz 7mo agoPer the article: "facing fines of $50,000 for every statement that could be seen to be “negative or otherwise detrimental” to Meta" > According to the web they still need a court to even confirm a monetary penalty. No, not necessarily with arbitration. The judgement itself may need to be confirmed in some states; it likely already has.
- ethin 7mo agoHonestly, I would be all for outright abolishing arbitration. I have yet to see anything actually good come out of arbitration other than a ruling that protects the entity that forced arbitration in the first place.
- asgraham 7mo agoThe good is hidden: court systems are already overwhelmed. If the arbitration cases were added, then it’d take even longer to get a court date. (Which isn’t to say I think the system as it is is good, just that there is a good)
- zb1plus 7mo agoSounds like the solution is just hire more judges instead
- ethin 7mo agoThen fix the court system? Create more courts, hire more judges/clerks... I mean, I know it isn't "as simple" as that, but that's the proper solution instead of creating a half-legal half-favoritist system where a company can force you into arbitration where, more often than not, the arbitrator is paid by the company, and therefore rules in it's favor.
- phil21 7mo agoOr reduce the demand on the legal system? Just adding more expense to an outright broken thing isn't an actual fix. It's a half-measure patch at best. And no, I don't mean create a workaround like arbitration. Why do court cases take so long and suck up so many resources? Start with that. Perhaps reduce the amount of legislation/laws/etc. on the books, and write laws that limit the litigious society we find ourselves living in. That is of course easier said than done, but we've chosen this path and can choose to unwind it if we have enough desire to.
- avidiax 7mo agoArbitration does help with the problem of overwhelmed and expensive courts. What is needed is fair arbitration. The outcome should approximate the outcome of the full court proceeding. Make the arbitration rulings appealable in court on the basis of factual errors, errors of law, corruption, and potential errors by omission (i.e. failure of discovery). And make the company responsible for the full costs of the litigation if the arbiter's judgement is overturned. And punish the arbiter, perhaps a 2 year ban on accepting any case from that industry. I'm sure more adjustments would be needed, but it should be possible to get both the arbiters and the companies to want arbitration to be a faster, cheaper route to the same outcome as the courts, rather than a steamroller that avoids all accountability for the company.
- sieabahlpark 7mo ago[dead]