Hello, On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Paul Keating <Paul@law.es> wrote:
So no, arbitration is not the golden child of dispute resolution systems.
Indeed, the NY Times wrote a series of articles in 2015 discussing arbitration as "stacking the decks of justice": https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/business/dealbook/arbitration-everywhere-... https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/02/business/dealbook/in-arbitration-a-privat... "To deliver favorable outcomes to companies, some arbitrators have twisted or outright disregarded the law, interviews and records show. “What rules of evidence apply?” one arbitration firm asks in the question and answer section of its website. “The short answer is none.” .... "Unfettered by strict judicial rules against conflicts of interest, companies can steer cases to friendly arbitrators. In turn, interviews and records show, some arbitrators cultivate close ties with companies to get business." .... "“It’s not a system of justice; it’s a rigged system of expediency,” Mr. Caplin said." ... "Cliff Palefsky, a San Francisco lawyer who has worked to develop fairness standards for arbitration, said the system worked only if both sides wanted to participate. “Once it’s forced, it is corrupted,” he said." ... "“I felt like I had been sucker-punched,” Ms. Brenner said." "Fearful of losing business, some arbitrators pass around the story of Stefan M. Mason as a cautionary tale. They say Mr. Mason ruled in favor of an employee in an age discrimination suit, awarding him $1.7 million, and was never hired to hear another employment case. While Mr. Mason’s experience was rare, more than 30 arbitrators said in interviews that the pressure to rule for the companies that give them business was real." I think it's very telling that in the dispute between Uber and Google/Waymo, Google was not interested in having it decided via arbitration, but demanded that it be in a real court: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2017/05/12/the_uber_google_legal_showdow... http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Waymo-v-Uber-heading-to-jury-11141668.php And ultimately it will be held in court, before a jury. The right to have legal disputes decided by a jury of ordinary citizens, rather than a judge/arbitrator is important (and is violated by Option 2). Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/