Changing Mandatory Arbitration to Optional Arbitration: A Better Business Decision
Loading...
Authors
Fisher, Karl
Issue Date
2021
Volume
54
Issue
4
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
ABSTRACT|Opponents of mandatory arbitration in consumer and employee contracts have filed numerous actions in courts across the United States, including the Supreme Court of the United States, challenging its legality. However, these attacks on mandatory arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) have consistently fallen short. As a result, the use of mandatory arbitration provisions in employee and consumer contracts in the United States has significantly increased over the past two decades. This has also led to a contentious national debate among jurists, legal scholars, and consumer and employee advocates. This Article seeks to end mandatory arbitration at the source by invoking a cost-benefit analysis that businesses should consider. This Article relies on both policy and empirical data to support the argument that it is a better business decision to remove mandatory arbitration provisions from contracts and replace them with provisions that give consumers and employees the option of either litigation or arbitration remedies. In fact, over the past two years, companies like Amazon and Google have already started to make such a shift.
Description
Citation
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law