Monthly Archives: March 2014

Arbitration is Bad for Employees. Trust me, I’m an Employee Rights Attorney.

Before I went to law school, I thought arbitration sounded neat. I had heard that lawsuits took years to resolve in court and were ridiculously expensive. Arbitration, on the other hand, sounded like an effective alternative to court. What is arbitration? As opposed to going to court, the feuding parties choose a “neutral” third party to review the facts, hear-out both sides, and make a ruling. Many proponents of arbitration say that it is faster, cheaper, and more fair. It’s not. Arbitration is bad for employees. Why? No jury. No media. No appeal. Period. Just an old white guy (usually) who rules with an iron fist. For those of you who like bullet points, here is a quick list of reasons why arbitration hurts employees:

Arbitration is Bad for These Seven Reasons

  • Unlike courts, arbitration is not a public system. Why is this bad? Because a company may repeatedly break the law, get sued in arbitration, but the public never finds out and there is no pressure on the company to ever make a change.
  • Unlike a judge in court, the arbitrator is not neutral. First, major corporations are constantly in arbitration against employees, and the corporation generally handpick arbitrators from firms with proven records of favoring the corporation. If word gets around that arbitrator ruled for an employee, the arbitrator gets blackballed by defense lawyers and goes out of business. It has happened. Second, and worse, many of these “neutral” arbitrators are under contract with corporations that engage in multiple cases. This is an enormous conflict of interest. Third, the company pays the majority of the arbitrators fee, essentially guilting the arbitrator to rule for the company.
  • Arbitrators do not have to reveal the reasons for his or her decision. They can say, “Company wins” and go home and take a nap. They are not legally accountable for errors, and their decisions do not set legal precedent for future cases.
  • Even if an arbitrator’s decision is legally incorrect, it still is enforceable, and there is nothing you can do about it. There is virtually no right to appeal an arbitrator’s ruling.
  • Generally, the company chooses the city or town where the case is heard, allowing it to make the case inconvenient, expensive, and unfair for employee bringing the complaint.
  • Arbitrators are not required to know the law relevant to the cases they adjudicate, follow legal precedents, or even be lawyers. Although most arbitrators are lawyers, it isn’t even a requirement!
  • Normal procedural rules for gathering and sharing evidence and safeguarding fairness to both parties do not apply in arbitration cases.

How to Avoiding Arbitration in Employment Disputes

  1. Don’t sign the arbitration agreement! This is the easiest way to avoid this mess. Arbitration is a contract, and contracts are not enforceable unless two parties agree. You don’t have to agree to it. If your employer asks you to sign an employment agreement, cross out the arbitration provision, initial and date it, and then give it to the employer. There is a risk that they won’t hire you, but if you’re a valuable hire I bet that many employers would simply ignore your failure to agree and hire you anyway. Make sure you get a copy of the revised agreement when you first get hired.
  2. Regardless of an existing signed arbitration agreement, have your lawyer file your case in court anyway. In many cases, the arbitration agreement is unenforceable due to various legal doctrines.

There is much more I could write on this subject. But I wanted to keep this article brief and to the point. Arbitration is bad and you should avoid it at all costs!

2 Comments

Filed under Arbitration, Uncategorized

Retaliation & Wrongful Termination in the Aerospace Industry

Many employees are retaliated against in the workplace. But not all retaliation or terminations are illegal.  This article discussed the case of Green v. Ralee Engineering Company. This case analyzes whether a company may fire an employee who complains about the failure to follow quality inspection protocols. In this case, the company manufactured airplane parts that were critical in keeping the plane safe.

Facts of the Wrongful Termination Case

In the mid 1990’s Ralee Engineering Company was sued by a former employee, Richard Green.  While employed, Mr. Green was a Quality Assurance Inspector. His duties were to inspect Ralee’s manufactured fuselage and wing components for military and civilian aircraft. Ralee supplied those parts to major airline assembly companies such as Boeing and to major war plane assembly companies such as Northrop.

Beginning in 1990, Mr. Green allegedly noticed that Ralee was shipping some airplane parts even though, according to him, they failed the inspections his team performed. On several occasions over the next two years, Mr. Green objected to Ralee’s practice to supervisory and management personnel and to the company president. He made all of his complaints internally, and at no time did he complain to outside government sources.

Despite his complaints, Ralee continued to ship allegedly defective parts to Boeing. In an effort to provide proof of the ongoing practice, plaintiff began photocopying the inspection reports, including some reports concerning parts destined for Boeing. In March 1991, Ralee shut down its night shift, citing a downturn in orders for the parts it produced. Ralee then fired Mr. Green along with other night shift employees.

Mr. Green filed a timely wrongful termination lawsuit against defendant. His attorney alleged Ralee terminated him in retaliation for his complaints about its inspection practices. His lawyer also argued that his complaints served a broad public policy favoring aviation safety, entitling him to tort damages even though he was an at-will employee.

Continue reading

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized, Wrongful Termination