3 ms·
Binding arbitration shouldn't be a thing. If we want to go to arbitration is because we are in the same level of negotiation. One side imposing arbitration or a
by braiamp 18d ago
Binding arbitration shouldn't be a thing. If we want to go to arbitration is because we are in the same level of negotiation. One side imposing arbitration or any other kind of restriction on the mechanism that the individual or organization has to redress issues shouldn't be a thing
- BeetleB 18d agoThe counterargument is that if you don't have binding arbitration, you can be constantly worried that the other party will drive you bankrupt with frivolous legal proceedings, and that fear discourages collaboration. A binding arbitration puts that fear at ease.
- LocalH 18d agoBanning binding arbitration means that class actions can happen.
- BeetleB 18d agoThat's irrelevant to the point I'm making. Class action is, almost by definition, a case where there is unequal power.
- AngryData 17d agoTo me that is a flaw in the justice system that needs to be resolved by legislation and within the justice system, not something that should have some bs extralegal work around.
- pwdisswordfishq 12d agoAh, yes, "fixing" the broken American rule for attorneys' fees by corrupting the justice system even further.