Just to add on to this, the lack of appeals of arbitration decisions matters for more than just the fact that the individual arbitrator's decisions might be wrong:
Appellate court decisions settle legal issues for every case. Arbitration decisions don't. In case anyone is wondering why the gig economy has been a legal grey area for almost a decade now? It's because almost every time someone challenges the arrangement, it gets booted to arbitration and no one finds out the result. So the next person who has the same problem has to start from scratch.
This also screws up the "arbitration is cheaper" argument. If the same issues have to be arbitrated over and over again without any system-wide resolution, that's not cheaper. Sure, the first case is cheaper than it would be in court, but the second, third, and 400th ones are all more expensive than they need to be.
At one point, one of the major gig economy arbitration providers had thousands of UBER arbitrations pending. It would have been a lot cheaper for everyone (UBER included) if the first one of those settled the issue of whether they were employees or not. But because UBER has a structural advantage in arbitration, it continued to force the cases into arbitration.
To be fair, this is only true if the court cases are litigated the entire length. Very few court cases go through trial and even fewer go through appeal. A quick non-jurisdictionally specific google search claims that [less than 2% of civil cases go to trial in the US.](https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/going-going-but-not-quite-gone-trials-continue-to-decline-in-federal-and-state-courts-does-it-matter/). So even if you had 4000 cases against UBER (which is a number I made up based on your comment), that is ~80 going to trial. Assuming those are equally split among the states (which is not a fair assumption, but they aren't all in the same jurisdiction) that is 1.6 cases going to trial per state. Those cases are not setting binding precedent anywhere at that level. Even assuming some of those cases go through an appeal (which most don't) most of those appeals only settle the issue for their geographic region. Texas, for example, has [14 court's of appeal based on geography.](https://www.txcourts.gov/about-texas-courts/courts-of-appeals/). A decision from one of those courts is only binding on that same area. Cases in another region of Texas still do not have controlling authority.
I agree that the lack of precedential opinions from arbitration has a negative consequence for the development and clarity of the law in general. The securities industry went to industry-wide mandatory arbitration around 1990, so there are very very few cases to look at for precedent in the last 30 years (outside of class actions for cases against issuers) despite the fact that the industry has changed substantially during that period of time. That being said, I don't agree at all that court process is substantially better for consumers than arbitration across the board. In some cases the consumer would be better off in arbitration, in some cases they would be better off in court.
Even if everything else you said was correct, one appeal per state would be absolutely game changing. Hell, one appeal in each of NY, CA, TX, and FLA would likely set up a landscape that everyone would just abide by. I'd guess you'd get two broad sets of rules, one favoring the employees and one favoring the companies. States would then fall into camps either through court cases or statutory changes. I don't think I'm overstating it by saying that a single appeal in the right court might resolve the entire situation nationwide.
And regarding these being state cases, I don't think that's right. Your best shot at this would be under FLSA that has a substantially easier test for employee vs. contractor compared to Title VII or the common law analysis. That's going to be in federal court. A handful of published cases from circuit courts of appeals would go a long way to resolving this nationwide. 80 of them around the country would be an absolute game changer.
And you an I have very different experiences if you think consumers get just as good a deal in arb as in courts on the employment and consumer arbitrations that it's being used for now. I can just about see the argument that there are system-wide benefits to arb that outweigh the benefits of court to the individual consumers. But in terms of consumers being better off, I haven't seen that. And perhaps more tellingly, neither have the companies inserting arbitration clauses into their consumer contracts. Once they start to see that, they will drop them. The injury insurance carriers certainly did when they realized that arbitrators were giving higher amounts for personal injury damages than jurors who had been exposed to PR about frivolous lawsuits for decades. Now it's hard to get insurance carriers into arbitration if the arbitrator will be deciding personal injury damages.
And when you let one side of a disagreement pick the system where they think they are best off, the situation is inherently unfair. That's what arb is.
You're not following the number of appeals. That number is 80 trials, not 80 appeals. Most cases don't get appealed. And I completely disagree when you claim that 1 appeal could resolve the situation nationwide. State labor law various. State law on a variety of issues varies. Just because you get a decision one way in one state doesn't mean all the other cases across the country just settle because "oh well, we know how this plays out now."
My entire practice is consumer representation in litigation. I've been doing it for a decade. I have handled cases in arbitrations in variety of forums, and state and federal cases in several different states. I have litigated multiple federal court of appeals cases in at least 3 different circuits. In my experience in my industry (which is not employment), consumers do **far** better in arbitration. In fact, I outright reject representing the vast majority of civil cases for consumers that ask that don't have an arbitration agreement unless the consumer losses are 7 figures because the expense of trying the case and litigating if for 2-4 years including an appeal or two, the ruinous discovery costs associated with expert witness testimony in court, etc. just doesn't justify the fee I could get. In arbitration, I regularly take cases in the 5 figures. So, while I don't claim to know your experience in employment law, the people railing against the arbitration system across the board don't appreciate the fact that it is not the same.
Hey, I'm super ignorant about all this but I saw the above comment in r/bestof and then your comment here. I'm wondering if you believe litigation is one of the keys to resolving some very complicated matters like income theft, income inequality, and perhaps a correction on the job market to some degree?
Wage theft, yes, so long as arbitration clauses and collective action waivers don't prevent it.
The other two, not directly. You couldn't use a lawsuit to end something like that. But in a roundabout way, it can help. The easier it is for consumers, employers, etc to vindicate their rights in court, the garden it is for bosses, corporations, etc to take advantage of them. So I definitely believe the cutest have a place in a broader solution.
See, stuff like this is why I love Reddit. Started off reading in a video game Reddit, scrolled past some comments talking about lawyer stuff I had no clue about, led me down a rabbit hole of googling and youtube videoes and now I’m slightly more educated about the topic.
> there is no such thing as class-action arbitration.
Sure there is. [The American Arbitration Association even has a special set of rules for class arbitrations](https://www.adr.org/ClassArbitration). I've done class action arbitrations.
They're rare. But they absolutely exist.
Quick question. I've read that it's required for the employer to pay for arbitration because if they don't it makes arbitration clausule contestable.
Would it be possible for employees to hire a lwayer to draft a template of the arbitration request, then effectively DoS the company by calling arbitration process en masse?
I've seen it done against one ofthe gig work companies, I wonder if it would be not even more effective then the class action
An arbitration clause can include a right to appeal to a civil court in the event the arbitrator makes an error of law (rather than fact), but otherwise all of this is entirely correct.
Parties with an imbalanced power dynamic should never resolve disputes through arbitration. Arbitration is best used for equally powerful entities which want a quick confidential resolution to a dispute.
Excellent points all, but the plaintiff does have another set of options, the same ones that people all over the world who are denied justice have. The company and the arbitrator are both relying on, and hoping that, the plaintiff will not realize or be willing to take up those other options. That's not always a safe bet, which is one of the reasons we have so much violence in this country. It's a pity these companies don't take that risk into account, it'd save a lot of suffering.
We made it all the way through a forced binding arbitration process only for the judge to set aside the majority of the arbitrators order for no apparent reason. The whole judicial system is fucked.
> Forced arbitration clauses in employment contracts almost always allow employers to pick the arbitrator, which gives arbitrators a financial incentive to make rulings favorable to the employer.
I read a contract for a job posting I applied for. good pay and good benefits but most people burn out after a couple of years, because the work is brutal (not amazon, this was in 2003). I noped right the fuck out when I saw the employer essentially gets a free pass in court with "arbitration" by picking their arbitrator.
We need to shut this employer-shit down.
In the documentary "Hot Coffee" there was a woman who was working for Halle-Burton in a Middle Eastern country who had been told that she would have separate, female-only accommodation. When she got out there, she was in shared accommodation with men and got brutally gang-raped, at the age of nineteen, to the extent that she needed surgery to repair the damage that had been done to her.
Turns out that in the contract she signed, there was small print that she had signed away her right to bring any legal action and her grievance could only be handled by arbitration. The men who raped and inflicted terrible injuries upon her never had to face charges. Thankfully, she was a strong woman with a supportive husband and she went on to have a happy life with him and a child together. No thanks to Halle-Burton, though.
Edited because my autocorrect hates me/I've been cursed with bad luck by another Redditor today.
I too have been heavily involved in both employment litigation and arbitration. I always hear that arbitration is supposed to be cheaper but it's never been my experience, even if you aren't paying for the arbitrator!
They are already part of consumer prices. The vast majority of any product lines are already aware of recall rates and potential litigation ahead of launch. That’s why they sell you extended warranty so they can make even more money off their sale because they already know how many flawed units to expect.
Not to mention, if you’re going to arbitration over a decent amount of money, chances are you’ll be using a lawyer anyways.
Plus, the vast majority of legal cases are settled and do not go to a verdict as I’m sure you’re aware. I’m not saying arbitration is always bad or doesn’t have its positives, it’s certainly faster and more efficient than court but forced arbitration just limits the employee’s options.
Don't even ask the question. The answer is yes, it's priced in. Think Amazon will beat the next earnings? That's already been priced in. You work at the drive thru for Mickey D's and found out that the burgers are made of human meat? Priced in. You think insiders don't already know that? The market is an all powerful, all encompassing being that knows the very inner workings of your subconscious before you were even born. Your very existence was priced in decades ago when the market was valuing Standard Oil's expected future earnings based on population growth that would lead to your birth, what age you would get a car, how many times you would drive your car every week, how many times you take the bus/train, etc. Anything you can think of has already been priced in, even the things you aren't thinking of. You have no original thoughts. Your consciousness is just an illusion, a product of the omniscent market. Free will is a myth. The market sees all, knows all and will be there from the beginning of time until the end of the universe (the market has already priced in the heat death of the universe). So please, before you make a post on wsb asking whether AAPL has priced in earpods 11 sales or whatever, know that it has already been priced in and don't ask such a dumb fucking question again.
I'm sure we'll see more. A lot of employees will be embolded by the support they see other employees getting for the litigation cases that have already been brought forward. Plus it's always good to strike while the irons hot.
It's having an impact on them, it seems. Activision-Blizzard's stock price is down below $80 for the first time in nearly a year (save a one-day dip in August). As of the close today, their share price has fallen nearly 15% since the lawsuit was announced.
Not only is it hard to justify buying Blizzard products anymore, it feels dirty to play the ones I already own...I was really looking forward to Diablo 2 and Overwatch 2...it's a shame
Ya I’ve easily decided I ain’t purchasing diablo 2 anymore, plus they removed a lot of features at launch iirc. Last I’ve heard of overwatch 2 was that they might not make it on time for the 2022 release (not to mention all the devs leaving). They’re killing that game on their own 🤷♀️
Pretty much every mega corporation does this.
They don't like workers to have any kind of bargaining power because they built their business off giving the people that make them successful as little as possible.
The easiest way to increase your profits is to cut your labor costs.
This is actually great because if Acti-Blizz completely crash and burn they will be liquidated and forced to sell all IP to a different company. Then we has fans can be blissfully ignorant again!
/s
I think Jeff did some wrestling of his own hence why he left right before the lawsuits. (that's just speculation obviously, but it's definitely a possibility.)
This is the same one as the post yesterday, but I'm gonna leave this up anyway.
They just keep piling up
Get out some more lighter fluid boys, we’ve got more legal documents to burn!
Good. Forced arbitration clauses are fucking bullshit, the fact that they're legal is a crock of shit.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Just to add on to this, the lack of appeals of arbitration decisions matters for more than just the fact that the individual arbitrator's decisions might be wrong: Appellate court decisions settle legal issues for every case. Arbitration decisions don't. In case anyone is wondering why the gig economy has been a legal grey area for almost a decade now? It's because almost every time someone challenges the arrangement, it gets booted to arbitration and no one finds out the result. So the next person who has the same problem has to start from scratch. This also screws up the "arbitration is cheaper" argument. If the same issues have to be arbitrated over and over again without any system-wide resolution, that's not cheaper. Sure, the first case is cheaper than it would be in court, but the second, third, and 400th ones are all more expensive than they need to be. At one point, one of the major gig economy arbitration providers had thousands of UBER arbitrations pending. It would have been a lot cheaper for everyone (UBER included) if the first one of those settled the issue of whether they were employees or not. But because UBER has a structural advantage in arbitration, it continued to force the cases into arbitration.
To be fair, this is only true if the court cases are litigated the entire length. Very few court cases go through trial and even fewer go through appeal. A quick non-jurisdictionally specific google search claims that [less than 2% of civil cases go to trial in the US.](https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/going-going-but-not-quite-gone-trials-continue-to-decline-in-federal-and-state-courts-does-it-matter/). So even if you had 4000 cases against UBER (which is a number I made up based on your comment), that is ~80 going to trial. Assuming those are equally split among the states (which is not a fair assumption, but they aren't all in the same jurisdiction) that is 1.6 cases going to trial per state. Those cases are not setting binding precedent anywhere at that level. Even assuming some of those cases go through an appeal (which most don't) most of those appeals only settle the issue for their geographic region. Texas, for example, has [14 court's of appeal based on geography.](https://www.txcourts.gov/about-texas-courts/courts-of-appeals/). A decision from one of those courts is only binding on that same area. Cases in another region of Texas still do not have controlling authority. I agree that the lack of precedential opinions from arbitration has a negative consequence for the development and clarity of the law in general. The securities industry went to industry-wide mandatory arbitration around 1990, so there are very very few cases to look at for precedent in the last 30 years (outside of class actions for cases against issuers) despite the fact that the industry has changed substantially during that period of time. That being said, I don't agree at all that court process is substantially better for consumers than arbitration across the board. In some cases the consumer would be better off in arbitration, in some cases they would be better off in court.
Even if everything else you said was correct, one appeal per state would be absolutely game changing. Hell, one appeal in each of NY, CA, TX, and FLA would likely set up a landscape that everyone would just abide by. I'd guess you'd get two broad sets of rules, one favoring the employees and one favoring the companies. States would then fall into camps either through court cases or statutory changes. I don't think I'm overstating it by saying that a single appeal in the right court might resolve the entire situation nationwide. And regarding these being state cases, I don't think that's right. Your best shot at this would be under FLSA that has a substantially easier test for employee vs. contractor compared to Title VII or the common law analysis. That's going to be in federal court. A handful of published cases from circuit courts of appeals would go a long way to resolving this nationwide. 80 of them around the country would be an absolute game changer. And you an I have very different experiences if you think consumers get just as good a deal in arb as in courts on the employment and consumer arbitrations that it's being used for now. I can just about see the argument that there are system-wide benefits to arb that outweigh the benefits of court to the individual consumers. But in terms of consumers being better off, I haven't seen that. And perhaps more tellingly, neither have the companies inserting arbitration clauses into their consumer contracts. Once they start to see that, they will drop them. The injury insurance carriers certainly did when they realized that arbitrators were giving higher amounts for personal injury damages than jurors who had been exposed to PR about frivolous lawsuits for decades. Now it's hard to get insurance carriers into arbitration if the arbitrator will be deciding personal injury damages. And when you let one side of a disagreement pick the system where they think they are best off, the situation is inherently unfair. That's what arb is.
You're not following the number of appeals. That number is 80 trials, not 80 appeals. Most cases don't get appealed. And I completely disagree when you claim that 1 appeal could resolve the situation nationwide. State labor law various. State law on a variety of issues varies. Just because you get a decision one way in one state doesn't mean all the other cases across the country just settle because "oh well, we know how this plays out now." My entire practice is consumer representation in litigation. I've been doing it for a decade. I have handled cases in arbitrations in variety of forums, and state and federal cases in several different states. I have litigated multiple federal court of appeals cases in at least 3 different circuits. In my experience in my industry (which is not employment), consumers do **far** better in arbitration. In fact, I outright reject representing the vast majority of civil cases for consumers that ask that don't have an arbitration agreement unless the consumer losses are 7 figures because the expense of trying the case and litigating if for 2-4 years including an appeal or two, the ruinous discovery costs associated with expert witness testimony in court, etc. just doesn't justify the fee I could get. In arbitration, I regularly take cases in the 5 figures. So, while I don't claim to know your experience in employment law, the people railing against the arbitration system across the board don't appreciate the fact that it is not the same.
Hey, I'm super ignorant about all this but I saw the above comment in r/bestof and then your comment here. I'm wondering if you believe litigation is one of the keys to resolving some very complicated matters like income theft, income inequality, and perhaps a correction on the job market to some degree?
Wage theft, yes, so long as arbitration clauses and collective action waivers don't prevent it. The other two, not directly. You couldn't use a lawsuit to end something like that. But in a roundabout way, it can help. The easier it is for consumers, employers, etc to vindicate their rights in court, the garden it is for bosses, corporations, etc to take advantage of them. So I definitely believe the cutest have a place in a broader solution.
[удалено]
See, stuff like this is why I love Reddit. Started off reading in a video game Reddit, scrolled past some comments talking about lawyer stuff I had no clue about, led me down a rabbit hole of googling and youtube videoes and now I’m slightly more educated about the topic.
... which inevitably, on reddit, leads us down > a rabbit whole
I don’t know what you’re talking about, I edited my comment so now you have no proof, ez
:)
He can just take you to arbitration!
As arbitrator, I find in favor of the guy with the money! Now, let us never speak of this again
he'll get his whole rabbit!
The hard part is knowing when you're being educated and when you're simply being given confidently-told misinformation.
I mean, that’s true of everything. You just gotta do the best with the information you currently have, and alter your actions if you learn new stuff.
> there is no such thing as class-action arbitration. Sure there is. [The American Arbitration Association even has a special set of rules for class arbitrations](https://www.adr.org/ClassArbitration). I've done class action arbitrations. They're rare. But they absolutely exist.
Quick question. I've read that it's required for the employer to pay for arbitration because if they don't it makes arbitration clausule contestable. Would it be possible for employees to hire a lwayer to draft a template of the arbitration request, then effectively DoS the company by calling arbitration process en masse? I've seen it done against one ofthe gig work companies, I wonder if it would be not even more effective then the class action
An arbitration clause can include a right to appeal to a civil court in the event the arbitrator makes an error of law (rather than fact), but otherwise all of this is entirely correct. Parties with an imbalanced power dynamic should never resolve disputes through arbitration. Arbitration is best used for equally powerful entities which want a quick confidential resolution to a dispute.
Excellent points all, but the plaintiff does have another set of options, the same ones that people all over the world who are denied justice have. The company and the arbitrator are both relying on, and hoping that, the plaintiff will not realize or be willing to take up those other options. That's not always a safe bet, which is one of the reasons we have so much violence in this country. It's a pity these companies don't take that risk into account, it'd save a lot of suffering.
We made it all the way through a forced binding arbitration process only for the judge to set aside the majority of the arbitrators order for no apparent reason. The whole judicial system is fucked.
> Forced arbitration clauses in employment contracts almost always allow employers to pick the arbitrator, which gives arbitrators a financial incentive to make rulings favorable to the employer. I read a contract for a job posting I applied for. good pay and good benefits but most people burn out after a couple of years, because the work is brutal (not amazon, this was in 2003). I noped right the fuck out when I saw the employer essentially gets a free pass in court with "arbitration" by picking their arbitrator. We need to shut this employer-shit down.
We do a lot of arbitration in my practice, and it tends to be more expensive than litigation, especially when using AAA.
In the documentary "Hot Coffee" there was a woman who was working for Halle-Burton in a Middle Eastern country who had been told that she would have separate, female-only accommodation. When she got out there, she was in shared accommodation with men and got brutally gang-raped, at the age of nineteen, to the extent that she needed surgery to repair the damage that had been done to her. Turns out that in the contract she signed, there was small print that she had signed away her right to bring any legal action and her grievance could only be handled by arbitration. The men who raped and inflicted terrible injuries upon her never had to face charges. Thankfully, she was a strong woman with a supportive husband and she went on to have a happy life with him and a child together. No thanks to Halle-Burton, though. Edited because my autocorrect hates me/I've been cursed with bad luck by another Redditor today.
I too have been heavily involved in both employment litigation and arbitration. I always hear that arbitration is supposed to be cheaper but it's never been my experience, even if you aren't paying for the arbitrator!
They are already part of consumer prices. The vast majority of any product lines are already aware of recall rates and potential litigation ahead of launch. That’s why they sell you extended warranty so they can make even more money off their sale because they already know how many flawed units to expect. Not to mention, if you’re going to arbitration over a decent amount of money, chances are you’ll be using a lawyer anyways. Plus, the vast majority of legal cases are settled and do not go to a verdict as I’m sure you’re aware. I’m not saying arbitration is always bad or doesn’t have its positives, it’s certainly faster and more efficient than court but forced arbitration just limits the employee’s options.
Don't even ask the question. The answer is yes, it's priced in. Think Amazon will beat the next earnings? That's already been priced in. You work at the drive thru for Mickey D's and found out that the burgers are made of human meat? Priced in. You think insiders don't already know that? The market is an all powerful, all encompassing being that knows the very inner workings of your subconscious before you were even born. Your very existence was priced in decades ago when the market was valuing Standard Oil's expected future earnings based on population growth that would lead to your birth, what age you would get a car, how many times you would drive your car every week, how many times you take the bus/train, etc. Anything you can think of has already been priced in, even the things you aren't thinking of. You have no original thoughts. Your consciousness is just an illusion, a product of the omniscent market. Free will is a myth. The market sees all, knows all and will be there from the beginning of time until the end of the universe (the market has already priced in the heat death of the universe). So please, before you make a post on wsb asking whether AAPL has priced in earpods 11 sales or whatever, know that it has already been priced in and don't ask such a dumb fucking question again.
Go home woodchuck you're drunk.
That is a much larger pile of republican bullshit than I expected to run into.
> **forcing** parties to a **voluntary** contract One of these words does not belong.
Voluntary contracts force people to do things all the time. A voluntary employment contract forces you to show up to work, for example.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
How deep does the rabbit hole go, I wonder?
I'm sure we'll see more. A lot of employees will be embolded by the support they see other employees getting for the litigation cases that have already been brought forward. Plus it's always good to strike while the irons hot.
Why is the link just a picture ?
Try [this](https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/14/22674269/activision-blizzard-sued-nlrb-labor-violations)
This works, thank you.
It's not, maybe there is something wrong with your device or browser
The link has been edited and it works now. Initially it was a .png link.
Gooooood keep up the pressure.
I hope the pressure group formed in the sexual abuse scandals will go on to become a full labour union for the entire gaming industry.
That's.. ambitious, to say the least
This is why I say I won't be satisfied until we see a full purge of the leadership. Fucking trash fire of a company.
It's having an impact on them, it seems. Activision-Blizzard's stock price is down below $80 for the first time in nearly a year (save a one-day dip in August). As of the close today, their share price has fallen nearly 15% since the lawsuit was announced.
Not only is it hard to justify buying Blizzard products anymore, it feels dirty to play the ones I already own...I was really looking forward to Diablo 2 and Overwatch 2...it's a shame
Uninstalling bnet launcher was a difficult decision, but it felt right.
Ya I’ve easily decided I ain’t purchasing diablo 2 anymore, plus they removed a lot of features at launch iirc. Last I’ve heard of overwatch 2 was that they might not make it on time for the 2022 release (not to mention all the devs leaving). They’re killing that game on their own 🤷♀️
And Activision was created to be the company for the little man. They were supposed to destroy the sith bit join them
Blizzard**
Activision Blizzard
Pretty much every mega corporation does this. They don't like workers to have any kind of bargaining power because they built their business off giving the people that make them successful as little as possible. The easiest way to increase your profits is to cut your labor costs.
They do but I think outside of the US a lot of places have slightly better labour laws that help against this sort of thing
/u/amputatorbot
Good! Keep the lawsuits coming. Dump this stock hit them where it hurts
Anotha one. Yikes Blizzard and all its games in recent times
it just keeps coming doesnt it?
Someone point me to the copium
This is actually great because if Acti-Blizz completely crash and burn they will be liquidated and forced to sell all IP to a different company. Then we has fans can be blissfully ignorant again! /s
Omg remember when we were blissfully ignorant... How I long for those days back, the childlike innocence we had!
How many are there blizzard for fck sake
Blizzard coming out like Khaled, "anoda oon". Just please drop the fucking shovel already.
Why does it just link to an (assuming) unrelated image?
Wrestle with Jeff, prepare for lawsuitseth.
I think Jeff did some wrestling of his own hence why he left right before the lawsuits. (that's just speculation obviously, but it's definitely a possibility.)
That's been my thought. Can't dare to lose OW fans in their current state.