Other evidence of such attacks on arbitration abounds. Recently, the NASD changed its rules to remove federal or state discrimination lawsuits from its arbitration requirement. [33] This leaves sole proprietorships in the sector free to enter into arbitration agreements with their registered staff. However, the EEOC describes these agreements as coercive. But is the arbitration table preferable to the courtroom for defendants? The evidence from the study is mixed. Employees won up to 38.46% of NYSE/NASD arbitrations, while only 22.12% of SDNY employees were victorious. (One reason for this is that referrals before the arbitration hearing were rare, unlike the practice in SDNY.) Another point raised by the study is that while litigation raises the specter of multi-million dollar judgments, many of these large judgments have been overturned on appeal. According to the study, a recent National Law Journal survey of jury verdicts in 1996 and 1997 found that 80 percent of jury verdicts worth $1 million or more were overturned (based on 36 cases pursued by post-trial motions). The SIA study also concluded that the defendants achieved significant cost savings due to the immense cost of jury proceedings and the relative efficiency of arbitration. As mentioned earlier, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau conducted a study on mandatory arbitration in the consumer credit industry, as required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. In addition to this study, Dodd-Frank also gives the CFPB the power to restrict or prohibit mandatory arbitration in consumer financial contracts.
Based on the results of its study, the CFPB is considering prohibiting class action waivers in binding arbitration agreements. Prohibiting the use of compulsory arbitration would eliminate the practice in the consumer credit sector and have a significant impact on credit card and other consumer debt contracts. [21] See Lepera v. ITT Corp. 1997 WL 535165, *6 (E.D.P.A. 1997) (New York law, not the FAA, applied to the arbitration agreement with the employer of the pilot transporting the company`s officer). The Lepera court noted that “according to the prevailing interpretation of the Section 1 exception, pilots who only carry goods – for example, pilots working for FedEx or another shipping company – are clearly exempt from the FAA because they transport goods directly through the retail chain. It makes no sense to overlay drivers based on their type of load?… Industrial relations in the railroad and aviation industries are governed by the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq. See the hearing before the Subcommittee on Aviation, House Transportation Committee on H.R. 991, to apply the Railroad Labor Act to pilots operating outside the United States (105th Cong.
1st Session, 1997). The Supreme Court has also repeatedly dealt with arbitration proceedings outside the context of employment or employment discrimination in cases that nevertheless concerned the guidelines contained in the policy statement: In general, here are a few points you want to negotiate in your arbitration agreement: the next thing you need to consider is whether or not you would sign your rights. Keep in mind that your employer may withdraw your job offer if you refuse to sign the arbitration agreement. In addition, employees can be fired at will if they refuse to sign. Colvin`s 2003 survey of dispute resolution procedures in the telecommunications industry found that 14.1 per cent of companies in the telecommunications industry had introduced compulsory arbitration and that these procedures applied to 22.7 per cent of non-unionized workers in the industry (large companies tend to introduce mandatory arbitration) (Colvin 2008). While companies are free to create any rules they want for arbitration, many choose to adopt the rules of an arbitration service provider established by reference. These arbitration service providers, such as the American Arbitration Association (AAA) or JAMS, administer the arbitration and provide lists of arbitrators to select the parties, courtrooms where arbitration can be conducted, and standard rules or procedures to follow. Organizations such as aaa and jamS are key players in the arbitration system. Although they are established as private non-profit organizations, they are also well-known organizations that face public pressure and confer legitimacy on arbitration. While the Concepcion decision has been interpreted as excluding most unscrupulous challenges to arbitration in the employment community, there is another line of reasoning that some have used to invalidate the waiver of the right to bring class or class actions. This is the argument that the class action ban would nullify the plaintiffs` substantive legal rights.
The Bleumer court found that Gilmer had ordered that the cePA claim be submitted to FAA arbitration and that the wording of the arbitration agreement provided for arbitration of the claim. [106] However, in order to avoid the in-depth analysis of the blue court and to increase the likelihood that a court will find that the parties have considered arbitration for a state legal claim in their agreement, it would be preferable to refer to the state laws in the arbitration provision to clarify the intent of the parties of: To settle claims under those laws. .
