View Poll Results: Do you support usurping individual rights to join class action lawsuits?

Voters
7. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 14.29%
  • No

    5 71.43%
  • I have no opinion

    1 14.29%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 57
Thanks Tree19Thanks

Thread: Regarding arbitration clauses in financial contracts

  1. #31
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    32,780
    Thanks
    30331

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    This is how laws get made! People lobby the government to protect them. So you are completely subservient to the law when it exists, but in the absence of law you defer to the more powerful side as necessarily right. Got it.

    I look forward to the day that the law is made and you turn on a dime and say "that's the law and theres nothing we can say against the law, because the law is the final word on everything"
    It is the law. I included a link to an article in an earlier post. It is a regulation enacted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I see now that it is being opposed by some in Congress.

    I remember many (if not most) Republicans on this site insisting that Hillary Clinton wasn't fit to serve as President because he was beholden to the bankers.

    Interesting...
    Thanks from StanStill and Ian Jeffrey

  2. #32
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    32,780
    Thanks
    30331

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Alaska Statutes 23.40.200. Classes of Public Employees; Arbitration

    (b) The class in (a)(1) of this section is composed of police and fire protection employees, jail, prison, and other correctional institution employees, and hospital employees. Employees in this class may not engage in strikes. Upon a showing by a public employer or the labor relations agency that employees in this class are engaging or about to engage in a strike, an injunction, restraining order, or other order that may be appropriate shall be granted by the superior court in the judicial district in which the strike is occurring or is about to occur. If an impasse or deadlock is reached in collective bargaining between the public employer and employees in this class, and mediation has been utilized without resolving the deadlock, the parties shall submit to arbitration to be carried out under AS 09.43.030 or 09.43.480 to the extent permitted by AS 09.43.010 and 09.43.300.

    (c) The class in (a)(2) of this section is composed of public utility, snow removal, sanitation, and educational institution employees other than employees of a school district, a regional educational attendance area, or a state boarding school. Employees in this class may engage in a strike after mediation, subject to the voting requirement of (d) of this section, for a limited time. The limit is determined by the interests of the health, safety, or welfare of the public. The public employer or the labor relations agency may apply to the superior court in the judicial district in which the strike is occurring for an order enjoining the strike. A strike may not be enjoined unless it can be shown that it has begun to threaten the health, safety, or welfare of the public. A court, in deciding whether or not to enjoin the strike, shall consider the total equities in the particular class. "Total equities" includes not only the effect of a strike on the public but also the extent to which employee organizations and public employers have met their statutory obligations. If an impasse or deadlock still exists after the issuance of an injunction, the parties shall submit to arbitration to be carried out under AS 09.43.030 or 09.43.480 to the extent permitted by AS 09.43.010 and 09.43.300.

    Why the yearning for arbitration all the time? Why arbitration? Oh. I know.

    IBEW Constitution, Objects:

    "The Objects of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers are:

    ...To settle all disputes between employers and employees by arbitration (if possible)"
    What is your point?

  3. #33
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,207
    Thanks
    9112

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    It is the law. I included a link to an article in an earlier post. It is a regulation enacted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I see now that it is being opposed by some in Congress.

    I remember many (if not most) Republicans on this site insisting that Hillary Clinton wasn't fit to serve as President because he was beholden to the bankers.

    Interesting...
    Touché. I thought they were trying to block the regulation from being enacted.

  4. #34
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    32,780
    Thanks
    30331

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    Touché. I thought they were trying to block the regulation from being enacted.
    They're planning to repeal it.

    The Republicans are already hard at work, serving their masters.

  5. #35
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    50,257
    Thanks
    23758

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    I know it breaks the liberals heart but if they have something you want either agree to the terms or do without.
    This is not about liberal versus conservative. Your vicious hatred for people you disagree with is irrelevant here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    The fact remains if the company has to deal with lots of litigation they have less to lend.
    They should stop doing things that get them sued. Mandatory arbitration clauses with waivers of the right to sue are designed to insulate companies from the consequences of bad behavior. I seem to recall you having a problem with such insulation in other contexts.
    Thanks from chaos

  6. #36
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,195
    Thanks
    3813

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    What is your point?
    That, consistent with the thread premise, we should question what would motivate an entity to want to end up in arbitration over any and every dispute.

  7. #37
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    32,780
    Thanks
    30331

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    That, consistent with the thread premise, we should question what would motivate an entity to want to end up in arbitration over any and every dispute.
    I personally have no problem with the concept of arbitration. If people choose to resolve their differences through arbitration, then that's fine by me. It is businesses serving the general public who collaborate to force people to waive their legal rights that bothers me. I support the regulations banning this practice for financial institutions.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  8. #38
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,108
    Thanks
    6735

    From
    A Month Away
    If you don’t like the terms, walk away. They have something you want.

  9. #39
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    32,780
    Thanks
    30331

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    If you don’t like the terms, walk away. They have something you want.
    You damned sure don't.

  10. #40
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,195
    Thanks
    3813

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    I personally have no problem with the concept of arbitration. If people choose to resolve their differences through arbitration, then that's fine by me.
    Same here. If the parties mutually agree to arbitration, and the terms by which it will be conducted, no problem.

    That's why my state's statutes (23.40) piss me off. The statute entitles certain entities to arbitration that want everything to go to arbitration.

    It is businesses serving the general public who collaborate to force people to waive their legal rights that bothers me. I support the regulations banning this practice for financial institutions.
    I share your sentiment, and include other types of organizations in that they too shouldn't be able to coerce anyone into arbitration, and state and federal laws shouldn't help them coerce.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Arbitration Court Nixes BP's Russia Tie-Up......
    By Midwest Media Critic in forum Economics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 25th March 2011, 11:23 AM
  2. let's try again - IMPLIED CONTRACTS
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 2nd November 2009, 01:48 AM
  3. more on implied contracts
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 19th September 2009, 08:20 PM
  4. implied contracts
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 16th September 2009, 07:19 PM
  5. Should this affect the Halliburton contracts?
    By johnlocke in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 13th March 2007, 08:31 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed