In the News

Forced Arbitration Is Unjust and Deeply Unpopular. Can Congress End It?

From Slate: 3/1/2019.

"In a truly harrowing story, the 87-year-old nun was raped in the nursing home where she resided, but her family was barred from suing the nursing home for negligence. Wells Fargo opened over 3 million fake accounts in customers’ names, but these customers were also blocked from court and forced into arbitration instead; they had no hope for redress until the Consumer Fraud Protection Bureau stepped in. And nearly 3,000 Chipotle workers were kicked out of a wage-theft lawsuit last year for the same reason."

Tech workers’ fight against forced arbitration gets a boost in Congress

From the Los Angeles Times: 2/28/2019.

"A new poll of 1,200 voters by Hart Research Associates found that 84% supported legislation to end arbitration requirements. Close to 90% of Republicans and 83% of Democrats supported the bill, and most preferred to have their own disputes heard in court, the survey found."

Read the full article here.

Democrats in step with Google on mandatory arbitration ban

From Yahoo Finance: 2/28/2019.

"The Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act of 2019, or “FAIR Act,” is the latest in a long history of proposed bills that have attempted but failed to defang the current statutory and Supreme Court framework maintaining enforceability of mandatory arbitration clauses."

Read the full article here.

This Is What Happens When You Try to Sue Your Boss

From Bloomberg: 1/24/2019.

"Millions of American workers sign away legal rights without knowing what they’re in for: Arbitration Hell."

Read the full article here.

No, Companies That Force Workers to Sign Away Their Right to Sue Are Not LGBTQ-Friendly

From Slate: 1/23/2019.

"The HRC will soon release its influential 2019 Corporate Equality Index, which scores companies on their corporate nondiscrimination policies for LGBTQ employees. But the index’s often-controversial criteria has a curious flaw: It doesn’t consider whether companies require employees to sign contracts with “forced arbitration clauses,” a legal loophole that waives workers’ right to sue over illegal treatment at work, like being denied overtime wages or getting fired for being queer or trans."

Now is the time for the SEC to protect defrauded investors

From The Hill: 12/26/2018.

"It is not just defrauded investors who are harmed when shareholder fraud cases are curtailed. SEC leaders from both parties have long maintained that private lawsuits serve as an essential supplement to the commission’s enforcement actions, both as a mechanism for compensating the victims of fraud and as a deterrent to violating the law."

Read the full article here.

Johnson & Johnson Drafted Into Fight Over Shareholder Lawsuits

From the Wall Street Journal: 12/13/2018.

"Supporters of mandatory arbitration say it would save companies money and time, arguing arbitration would be faster and less expensive than grinding out federal lawsuits involving thousands of investors. Proponents argue that class-action access to the courts is vital for holding corporations and executives accountable to shareholders."

Read the full article here.

Does Delaware law preclude mandatory arbitration of federal securities claims?

From Reuters: 11/8/2018.

"Shareholder rights activists, meantime, are preemptively arguing that mandatory shareholder arbitration is illegal. The consumer advocacy group Secure Our Savings, for instance, has just released a white paper in which 21 of the most eminent securities law professors in the country contend that Delaware law does not allow corporations to frog-march shareholders into arbitration of their claims under federal securities law."

Google Overhauls Sexual Misconduct Policy After Employee Walkout

From the New York Times: 11/8/2018.

"Google said on Thursday that it would end its practice of forced arbitration for claims of sexual harassment or assault after more than 20,000 employees staged a walkout last week to protest how the internet company handles cases of sexual misconduct."

Read the full article here.

North Carolina Green Beret fighting cancer, government, over medical mistake

From FOX 46 Charlotte: 11/5/2018.

"But the case is unlikely to make it to trial. That's because under a 1950 Supreme Court decision, called the "Feres Doctrine," active duty military are prevented from suing the government for injuries incidental to military service. If Stayskal was a civilian he would have the right to sue for medical malpractice. Because he was active duty, he can't."


Subscribe to RSS - blogs