US Chamber Legal Leader Warns of Flood of Lawsuits if Congress Ends Forced Arbitration
Rickard issued a statement Thursday after two Democratic members of Congress introduced measures in the House and Senate to end forced arbitration clauses in company contracts and employee handbooks.
February 28, 2019 at 05:04 PM
4 minute read
Corporations and their general counsel can brace for a flood of class action lawsuits if Congress passes legislation introduced Thursday aimed at eliminating forced arbitration, according to Lisa Rickard, president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform.
Rickard issued a statement Thursday after two Democratic members of Congress introduced measures in the House and Senate to end forced arbitration clauses in company contracts and employee handbooks. The legislation is called the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act or the FAIR Act; Rickard called it a “forced litigation” act.
A spokesperson at JAMS, an alternative dispute resolution center, told Corporate Counsel, “JAMS doesn't take positions on legislative or public policy as we are a neutral organization.” Eric Tuchmann, general counsel of the American Arbitration Association, was not available for comment.
Requiring arbitration in corporate contracts has been heavily criticized after it was revealed that 21st Century Fox Inc. used them to help keep secret cases of sexual misconduct brought against executives and that Wells Fargo & Co. used them to try to hide customer and employee complaints about its fake bank accounts.
The outcry grew so loud that last fall Google Inc. and Facebook Inc. ended forced arbitration for sexual harassment claims. And Google announced last week that it would end forced arbitration on all workplace claims by March 21.
The American Association for Justice, a pro-plaintiff organization, released polling numbers Thursday that found broad bipartisan support of 84 percent of the voters in favor of legislation to end forced arbitration.
Linda Lipsen, CEO of the association, said in a statement, “Forced arbitration clauses buried in the fine print hurt everyone. If corporations know they won't ever be held publicly responsible, our civil rights, as well as our public health and safety are at risk, from the cars we drive, to the jobs we take, and the food we eat.”
Paul Bland, executive director of Public Justice, agreed. Bland issued a statement in support of the legislation, saying, “The energy in favor of the FAIR Act is like nothing I've seen before in this fight for corporate accountability and against perpetrators of gender and race discrimination. Its passage would make American life much safer, healthier, and fairer.”
Earthjustice, an environmental law group, also announced its support for the legislation. Patrice Simms, vice president of litigation and head of the Access to Justice program at Earthjustice, said in a statement, “Forced arbitration clauses literally pick consumers' pockets by putting big business's favored arbitrators in charge, leaving regular people with no choice but to accept secretive, one-sided proceedings for their claims.
But the Chamber's Rickard strongly disagreed. She countered, “While proponents of this legislation make eliminating arbitration sound good, in reality, it is simply a forced litigation scheme that will cut most people off from justice.”
She argued that for many Americans, arbitration is a better path to justice because it is simpler, fairer, cheaper and faster than going to court. “Most arbitration cases can be done without the services of a trial lawyer, which is the problem for the plaintiffs' bar,” Rickard said.
Her statement concluded, “The package of proposals introduced [Thursday] would eliminate the ability of the vast majority of employees and consumers to solve most disputes, while creating class action lawsuits that primarily benefit plaintiffs' lawyers.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAs AI Transforms Drug Development, FDA Is Scrambling to Figure Out Guardrails
5 minute readElection Outcome Could Spur Policy U-Turns Across Employment Landscape
6 minute readPolicy Wonks' Obsession: What Will Tuesday's Election Mean for FTC Firebrand Khan?
6 minute readInside Track: Lawyers for Big Tech Give Harris Benefit of Doubt, Despite Pummeling They Took Under Biden
Trending Stories
- 1Will the 9th Circuit Still be Center Stage in Trump Policy Challenges?
- 2Obtaining Reimbursement from Medicaid
- 3NY Requiring Lawyers to Report Out-of-State Admissions, Public Discipline
- 4Man Hits Cow in Case That Tests 'Unrealistic Delivery Times'
- 5DC Judge, Applying 'Loper Bright,' Dismisses Complaint in Medicare Drug-Classification Dispute
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250