Question: should forced mediation-arbitrarion agreements be allowed by law?

[ThisIsMe]

Mediation and arbitration agreements are very common and many employers force their employees to sign them or face termination by their company.

These agreements are completely legal and decisions made under them are generally irrevocable and not able to be appealed unless its to the arbitration process.

These agreement are almost always for the benefit of the company and harm employees because they remove the right to sue in court for any dispute, included work related injuries. These agreements benefit the company because there is no trial, no jury, arbitration can involve less formal discovery, meaning employees may have a harder time getting documentation and evidence from the employer, rewards are often less. These agreements can prevent employees from suing for violations of key employment laws, such as those related to wages, discrimination, and family leave. Employees are less likely to win than if they went to court.

I was reading about these agreements and I cannot fathom why these are not considered a violation of due process. You basically have to sign your rights away or the company can fire you.

Do you think this should be allowed?

 

[Dekster]

Mediation and arbitration agreements are very common and many employers force their employees to sign them or face termination by their company.

These agreements are completely legal and decisions made under them are generally irrevocable and not able to be appealed unless its to the arbitration process.

These agreement are almost always for the benefit of the company and harm employees because they remove the right to sue in court for any dispute, included work related injuries. These agreements benefit the company because there is no trial, no jury, arbitration can involve less formal discovery, meaning employees may have a harder time getting documentation and evidence from the employer, rewards are often less. These agreements can prevent employees from suing for violations of key employment laws, such as those related to wages, discrimination, and family leave. Employees are less likely to win than if they went to court.

I was reading about these agreements and I cannot fathom why these are not considered a violation of due process. You basically have to sign your rights away or the company can fire you.

Do you think this should be allowed?

Well, here in Virginia Worker's Compensation is almost always your exclusive remedy for work related injuries, so would you rather take up your case with a mediator or a bureaucratic Nazi?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Well, here in Virginia Worker's Compensation is almost always your exclusive remedy for work related injuries, so would you rather take up your case with a mediator or a bureaucratic Nazi?

I think being forced to sigh away your rights to sue your company for things they may have done to you is questionable. If you are seriously injured, or discriminated against, or the victim of sexual harassment, or any other thing you can think of, you lose your right to sue in exchange for an arbitration process that is stacked against you, gives you less rights, less access to evidence, less access to documents to help you prove your case, less payout and less chance of even winning.

I mean, that seems like its potentially harmful to employees.

 

[Dekster]

I think being forced to sigh away your rights to sue your company for things they may have done to you is questionable. If you are seriously injured, or discriminated against, or the victim of sexual harassment, or any other thing you can think of, you lose your right to sue in exchange for an arbitration process that is stacked against you, gives you less rights, less access to evidence, less access to documents to help you prove your case, less payout and less chance of even winning.

I mean, that seems like its potentially harmful to employees.

Not having a job is harmful to employees as well. Arbitration/mediation isn't always the worst path in the world. A lot of old judges do it as a hobby hustle when they retire. In my state, there is a judicial bypass after the fact if you can demonstrate the mediator was biased, their decision was unfair or factually mistaken, etc etc

 

[ThisIsMe]

Not having a job is harmful to employees as well. Arbitration/mediation isn't always the worst path in the world. A lot of old judges do it as a hobby hustle when they retire. In my state, there is a judicial bypass after the fact if you can demonstrate the mediator was biased, their decision was unfair or factually mistaken, etc etc

So you think that its ok for a company to demand you sign your rights away under penalty of losing your job?

The fact that they forced you to sign it or lose your job could bring up a case for duress, which would mean any legal document signed would be voided by court.

 

[Dekster]

So you think that its ok for a company to demand you sign your rights away under penalty of losing your job?

The fact that they forced you to sign it or lose your job could bring up a case for duress, which would mean any legal document signed would be voided by court.

What is legal is often not what is "okay". You can go with that, but unless you have a contract, they can pretty much fire you for any reason other than race, gender, yada yada in my state as an at will employee.

 

[ThisIsMe]

What is legal is often not what is "okay". You can go with that, but unless you have a contract, they can pretty much fire you for any reason other than race, gender, yada yada in my state as an at will employee.

I understand at will employment. So you are a proponent of mediation arbitration agreements then?

 

[otto105]

Mediation and arbitration agreements are very common and many employers force their employees to sign them or face termination by their company.

These agreements are completely legal and decisions made under them are generally irrevocable and not able to be appealed unless its to the arbitration process.

These agreement are almost always for the benefit of the company and harm employees because they remove the right to sue in court for any dispute, included work related injuries. These agreements benefit the company because there is no trial, no jury, arbitration can involve less formal discovery, meaning employees may have a harder time getting documentation and evidence from the employer, rewards are often less. These agreements can prevent employees from suing for violations of key employment laws, such as those related to wages, discrimination, and family leave. Employees are less likely to win than if they went to court.

I was reading about these agreements and I cannot fathom why these are not considered a violation of due process. You basically have to sign your rights away or the company can fire you.

Do you think this should be allowed?

No

 

[Dekster]

I understand at will employment. So you are a proponent of mediation arbitration agreements then?

I don't support or oppose them. He who has the gold makes the rules. That isn't me.