DISQUS

California Labor & Employment Law: Arbitration Works Better than Lawsuits . . . But for Whom?

  • Lance · 1 year ago
    Great article post about the pros and cons of arbitration. One thing I'd like to point out from your comments:

    "It would be interesting to know how many consumers/employees the author represents in her daily practice at Hogan & Hartson. I’m willing to bet - Zero. She sure does seem to be very concerned about their welfare though."

    How can you use that logic when you are being critical on the same basis? Everyone speaks out of self-interest and I am guessing you wouldn't be posting something like this if you worked in a different area of law. It would seem that by what you practice, you have an overwhelming concern to bring attention to this legislation and to encourage its passage for your own welfare.

    Not saying that you also don't think it is the right thing to do in general but it is funny how often the "right thing" and "the thing that makes me money" so often aligns. That goes for you, Ms. Varney and myself.
  • eugenedlee · 1 year ago
    Lance,

    Thanks for stopping by and leaving your thoughtful comment. I've been a long-time admirer of your blog, www.YourHRGuy.com and I'll be sure to comment more in the future.

    Now on to your point. I won't dispute that I act out of self-interest in opposing mandatory arbitration. Not. at. all. I'm a capitalist and believer in Adam Smith's invisible hand.

    But there is one very important distinction between me and Ms. Varney (author of the WSJ editorial). You won't ever see me arguing how my position is the Right Thing To Do for Employers and Fortune 500 Companies, with nary a mention of how it happens to benefit me and my clients. I will always freely disclose how my position happens to also benefit me.

    Ms. Varney portrays herself as a champion of consumers and employees, and even suggests that her advocacy may be to the detriment of Big Business (who happen to be her clients, though she never discloses this).

    That's just not right. That's manipulative.

    Public discourse in this country has fallen down quite a ways since the days of Lincoln and Douglas. Ms. Varney's dishonest arguments are just the latest example of this. If I ever do anything like that, call me out on it and I won't hesitate to get my comeuppance.
  • Lance · 1 year ago
    Fair enough. I thought the disclosure on her part was enough as it is better than none at all (as is the case many times). As soon as I saw she worked for a law firm, I guessed she had a vested interest in ensuring the law failed but maybe I am always a skeptic of op-eds from non-journalists.

    I am glad you are a reader of my blog. I am always sorry I do not get to regularly comment on all of the blogs I read. I always enjoy talking about these sorts of issues which is why you are usually in my reader.
  • Marc · 1 year ago
    Its definitely not an easy sell for either side.

    But saving court time, court fees and tax payer money is major factor in my book.
  • ashsolicitors · 10 months ago
    Great advice!

    Very nice read. Thank you for the information.Finally, I found a site that I can depend on for good content.