An independent investigation by journalists featured in the New York Times on Sunday offers an in-depth look at the way American corporations have used the inclusion of "arbitration clauses" within consumer contracts to strategically circumvent judicial review of their behavior and immunize themselves from class action lawsuits –"realistically the only tool citizens have to fight illegal or deceitful business practices."
Arbitration clauses are also one of the ways that corporations and agencies out maneuver grievances by union members and strikes. The arbitrators are paid by the corporations and agencies and are just people who have taken a course or two. They know which side to endorse their paycheck on.
Now that SCOTUS has made it the law that corporations are people, the Constitution is correct where it states: OF THE PEOPLE; BY THE PEOPLE; AND FOR THE PEOPLE.
Yes, I guess Dim Son was correct; it is just a damn piece of paper!
But then we couldn't buy more than we can afford.
Click here now, or read the 17-page agreement before you get to look at the nudie pictures. Now which is it going to be???
I suspect the TPP and the other "free-trade" deals are designed to thwart any long-overdue demands for oversight or attempt to rein-in corporate pirates and banker/financial parasite evasions of justice from those they steal from and cheat - so-far with impunity and government collusion.
"Yes, as through this world I've wandered
I've seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen." - Woody Guthrie
An independent investigation by journalists featured in the New York Times
(Using the Single Brain Cell shared amoungst themselves)
You just noticed this now?
Good article, but actually this is hardly just within the decrepit United Stated. The parallel to these opt-out clauses being used domestically are those insider dispute settlement claims embedded into all--secret or otherwise--tenets of the TPP and TIPP.
Corporations--via their high paid lawyers--are testing the law to see how far they can go in immunizing their clients from ANY form of legal redress. The same rationale is part of the TPP.
Corporations, under the right wing brand of "freedom" hold themselves free to break or ignore many laws; but citizens have NO recourse.
Oh come on!
"Our" government, nor its myriad contractors, employees nor elected officials are held accountable. Why should the corporations (who, after all, own "our" government) not be afforded the same immunity?
Will the people's government step in and stop the corporations, wait they are one and the same, guess not.
I've always thought this all to be true. How can you deem yourself legally untouchable by law. It's an asinine concept. Not to mention, completely based on the model of sociopathy. the rules don't apply to me. I have this paper me and my friends wrote. Um yeah. People need to continue to take these people to court even when they say 'oh the law doesn't apply to us, we're special." Then if the court dismisses your case based on the hotshots and their piece of paper a person needs to start writing in the newspaper and the internet how So and So company has written itself a paper that says they can commit any crimes they want. Then after that, everyone that has had this experience needs to start a class action lawsuit demanding that real law is complied with. Many bullies have told a kid their candy is theirs because the kid did this or that and demanded that was really the way things worked and many kids believe them. Well, don't be that kid. We need to stop being those kids and get this crap stopped.
Or how any of these corporations expect you to read all this mumbo jumbo while you're sitting there and they keep talking to you.
BDS !! And start complaining about the Israeli Loyalty Oath that AIPAC demands our representatives sign putting Israel first and agreeing to hand over blood and treasure for a country where we have no democratic reach. This is treason. Period.
US PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE IN ISRAEL!!
Binding arbitration agreements have been used by the brokerage industry forever, and now have spread out to a lot of other industries and areas. It's original intent was to settle disputes quickly, via a disinterested third party, and avoid lengthy and costly litigation. Sounds good in theory, but where do you find a disinterested third party anymore? So, what could have been a good idea turned to crap, with corporations using it as a way to avoid lawsuits and do nothing.
Same could be said about class action suites. Started out as a way for many people of limited means to band together if they have all experienced a similar loss or injustice and file a suit. Brown vs The Board of Education was a class action suit. In the last twenty years though, they have turned into a giant pot of gold for tort attorneys and crumbs for the plaintiffs. Attorneys shop around to find an "injury" , no matter how small, to a group of people and then file a class action suit. They file suit to get the corporation to make amends...the corporation settles. The attorneys make millions, or tens of millions..the plaintiffs get a coupon or a dollar or two credited to their account. The corporation then passes along the cost of settling to the consumers.
The entire system is stacked against the little guy either way. We need a do over on the whole mess.
We need a lot of things. How about real product testing of the drugs littering the TEEVEE. The disclaimers and modifiers at the end of the advertisements are longer than the actual product being pitched. My colleagues only half jokingly say, " enjoy this erection it could be your last one. " Who doesn't know someone who was given a doctor's prescription where the cure was more dangerous than the condition? And, the exorbitant medical insurance, after co-pays and deductibles, forced a medical bankruptcy. But, the ACA fixed all that right? Tip of the iceberg stuff, too. Captured gov't, much?
Corporations do not craft contracts for our benefit. Period. Anyone thinking their contract with Comcast, for example, protects you from anything has rocks in their head. These arbitrations are a joke. They are crafted to circumvent laws that do protect you. The best you can do is say no.
Before the "screen only" download, that required clicking "agree", if you wanted the product, I would send a letter and copy of the corporation's contract notifying them that I would "not agree" to all their conditions. I never got a response.
Haha...you are right!
By noon on Sept. 11, 2001, the U,S. Constitution had been suspended, and the implementation of martial law was underway.
hope you sent it certified receipt request and kept the stub and a copy
i would have to agree. But that aside I hope that some journalist writes an article about the bizarre and twisted 'agreements' that read like the self-serving solipsistic definition of 'arbitrage'.
The simultaneous purchase and sale of an asset in order to profit from a
difference in the price. It is a trade that profits by exploiting price
differences of identical or similar financial instruments, on different
markets or in different forms. Arbitrage exists as a result of market
inefficiencies; it provides a mechanism to ensure prices do not deviate
substantially from fair value for long periods of time.[emphasis added - because its good to start the day with a whalloping good laugh]