Like, it’s such a punch in the face of the user when it’s hidden in the terms of service. It’s so scummy it hurts. I still can’t believe corporations are getting away with avoiding going through the legal system like that.
Here are the cons of an arbitration clause:
- You lose the right to class action lawsuits
- It’s less public than going through the legal system
It definitely should be. Employers should not have the ability to just decide they don’t want to be sued and pretending like the employees have a choice in the matter is a joke. Most of them. Are wage salves and can’t afford to be fired for not agreeing to forced arbitration.
As a general rule, arbitration is a great tool for multiple parties to resolve a dispute without going all the way to trial.
The issue isn’t with arbitration on it’s face, but forced arbitration as dictated by a single party.
No. Arbitration can save all parties time and money in many types of disputes. It’s often reasonable for a negotiated contract between near-peer parties to contain an arbitration clause.
What should be illegal is arbitration clauses in non-negotiable terms of service.
Because the wrong people are in power to allow it to happen.
It’s legal because people agree to it as part of entering a contract. And as scummy as you or I may believe it to be, people still enter into such contracts, and courts have not ruled them unconscionable.
people agree to it
Hardly an agreement if it’s predicated on access to a service, particularly if the service is a utility, a monopoly, or a cartel.
If every vendor uses uniform language as a means of mitigating their own collective liability, the agreement is functionally coerced.
I agree, but I also think we need to be aware of what we agree to when entering service agreements. Certainly for something like an ISP for which there is often a monopoly there may not be much of a choice, but even when you do have a choice, how often do you actually read what you’re agreeing to? We have the option to try to vote with our wallets, but instead we’ve collectively just continued to sign up for services that have arbitration agreements. If companies see only token resistance to such contracts then they’re not going to be deterred.
even when you do have a choice, how often do you actually read what you’re agreeing to?
You don’t bother precisely because it’s an enormous amount of work for no discernable benefit.
What are you doing to do? Not rent a car or fly on a plane? Not own any electronics or motorized vehicles? Not rent an apartment? Not use software?
We have the option to try to vote with our wallets
Do we? What good is money if we can’t spend it?
I suppose you’re right. We are powerless and griping on the internet is the only catharsis available to us!
It’s helpful to understand what you actually have control over, rather than confusing good fortune for savvy decision making.
It’s also helpful to understand when you’re not completely powerless, rather than confusing complacency for inevitability.
Very important to know the difference and be clear eyed about it
