Yes, California. Pass this and show the rest of the country how this is done.

Yes, California. Pass this and show the rest of the country how this is done.

In the meantime, however, California has a quick fix. Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher’s Assembly Bill 3080 would bar companies here from requiring mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition of employment.

State lawmakers should pass it. From the #MeToo movement to the Fight for $15, this blue state talks a good game about worker protections. But if workers can’t work without signing away civil rights, and can’t complain unless it’s in secret in a stacked, shadow court system, those rights aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.

California: Outlaw forced arbitration as a condition of a job | The Sacramento Bee

Mandatory arbitration as a condition of employment is eroding workers’ rights. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on May 21, 2018, that arbitration clauses can bar employee class action lawsuits. Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher’s Assembly Bill 3080 says California jobs can’t be conditioned on them.

This entry was posted in Politics: California Edition and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Yes, California. Pass this and show the rest of the country how this is done.

  1. Jay Gischer says:

    I’m uncertain about this, mostly because arbitration is much, much cheaper than a full-blown lawsuit. I mean, yeah, the best cases will be taken on contingency, but what about the rest of them?

  2. Cindy Brown says:

    Except that corporations have shown over and over and over and over and over and over and over again that they abuse it to shut down any recourse for justice that the individual can accomplish. Especially when corporations sneak it in or insist you have no choice but to consent to arbitration to be employed, etc.

    Arbitration sounds good in principle, in practice it is horribly abused.

  3. Jay Gischer says:

    Let’s stipulate that yeah, corporations will use/abuse whatever system is in place to produce the maximum advantage to themselves.

    I think that happens, at least in some companies.

    So, what will they do under the new system to make things rough on employees? Will it be better or worse for those employees? I can frankly say that I don’t know.

    This feels very reactive. I’m ok with trying stuff out as long as we don’t get so committed to it that we can’t try something else if it doesn’t work out.

  4. AJA BOOBOO says:

    Wow this is shitty
    Forced arbitration is a corporate protection plan that will protect horrible companies abuses and completely nullify any attempts made to stop said abuses.
    It’s a really bad ruling and the supreme Court is nothing but a puppet to the corporations just like our government.

    Forced arbitration means that if your employer violates say pay laws as in there checks are late, low or fraudes by lowering your hours on book from what you and all other employees worked, you as a group can not pool together to seek justice and are forced to pay all legal expenses yourself.

    Try going up against a multi billion dollar corporation by yourself on measly wages…..

    Anyone who thinks that forced arbitration is good even in principle is really, really ignorant.

    This opens the door for massive abuses to occur without any ability to fight it or even bring it to public atention.

    Honestly is makes sense the Court ruled that way. They are seated by fascist corporatists who despise democratic ideals and want to bring an end to this country as a republic so corporate executives and extremely wealthy people can rule over us all like we are their property…. plutocracy is what we were in, now it’s a kleptocratic/fascist hybrid.

  5. Cindy Brown says:

    Here’s the thing. This doesn’t touch cooperative non binding arbitration, which can indeed be a reasonable, quick, and less expensive way to settle things. Nothing has affected that. What’s being removed is the tactic — pioneered by corporations — of trying to make it arbitrary, binding, and impossible to go to court if a solution can’t be found.

    Class action suits have also been weakened, which is another problem because class actions allow people to pool their resources against a larger entity (we are back to the disproportionate force & clout that a corporation has).

    I don’t know if it’s a game of whackamole or not, though certainly corporations need other brakes (that are also being loosened) to keep them from stomping all over the rest of us 😛

    This might also provide more understanding of the issue.

  6. Cindy Brown says:

    Here’s another illustration in this twitter thread. – Dave Jamieson, LLC on Twitter

  7. AJA BOOBOO says:

    Cindy Brown um this isn’t about consumer arbitration.
    It’s about labor arbitration.

    When labor at a business is being abused via low pay or wage law violations, they can not band together to form a class action group against the corporation and instead will be forced to individually fight the corporation through forced arbitration.

    I don’t know about most people but my self and others that I know do not have millions of dollars individually to fight against corporate employer abuses.

    Maybe you should stop being a propagandist and read the court case and arguments and the verdict because what you are spewing and what the law is actually about are two different things.

  8. Cindy Brown says:

    I have no idea what point you’re making. I haven’t discussed consumer arbitration at all. I’m not in favor of forced arbitration and have consistently posted examples of why it goes wrong.

    So where I’m a “propagandist”…. Not really going to listen to a bobble-head idiot with no posts and no followers.


  9. Looks like this has passed the Assembly and is sitting in committee in the Senate right now?