Live data from Hacker News

A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

nytimes.com

11–20 of 250 posts

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#11

As a European, reading these articles on arbitration, no-compete, required licenses, 'right-to-work', tipping, "gig work", firing over zoom, and so much more, it seems U.S. workers could really use some collective bargaining? Here unions are the obvious century-old solution to improve working conditions, why don't workers organize there? Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care?

Many people don't like unions, and most companies heavily discourage their employees from joining one.

In particular, many working class people who would benefit from strong unions are opposed to unions, or even if they are not opposed do not consider how their voting patterns/choices affect union viability.

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#12

As a European, reading these articles on arbitration, no-compete, required licenses, 'right-to-work', tipping, "gig work", firing over zoom, and so much more, it seems U.S. workers could really use some collective bargaining? Here unions are the obvious century-old solution to improve working conditions, why don't workers organize there? Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care?

>Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care?

You don't hear as much about European problems online, because they're spoken about in the respective nation's language. This means that it's hard to compare. Most European countries also have many problems like the US. Maybe not to quite the same extreme, but they do exist. The US does have a few things going for it though: very strong protections of speech, very high wages, a system of incredible services - things like Amazon, FedEx etc. From my perspective, things in the US actually seem better than in Europe for the long-term. They just have a few very obvious pain points like healthcare and the silliness of a lack of worker protections in some states.

Just keep in mind that unions aren't universal across Europe or even the EU. They usually exist, but they tend to not have much leverage.

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#13

As a European, reading these articles on arbitration, no-compete, required licenses, 'right-to-work', tipping, "gig work", firing over zoom, and so much more, it seems U.S. workers could really use some collective bargaining? Here unions are the obvious century-old solution to improve working conditions, why don't workers organize there? Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care?

Unions have suffered from a bad reputation in the United States over the past few decades.

Some of it is deserved BTW; some big unions were/are corrupted and some were connected with organized crime. Even more innocently, unions have been quite conservative; as jobs and technology changed some were very resistant and fought modernization (requiring people who were not needed to be around). But a lot of it also stems from corporate resistance to unionization and the high regard in which ordinary people hold the opinions of corporate managers in the USA.

All that being said, unions have been very good for labor, and when I've worked in union shops (not in a unionized role) they've been really great in terms of qualified people and high quality work. I built my house using union labor and I'm glad I did.

Europe is not immune to these diseases by the way. Certain French unions certainly negotiate against the greater interests of society. And in Germany my non-unionized brother in law (a mechanical engineer) was not allowed to work late at VW -- he was trying to finish a project one evening and a union guy came by and cut his PC's power cable while he was designing a part.

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#14
> The International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, or C.P.R., was willing to allow DoorDash to arbitrate “test cases” and avoid having to pay the fees all at once. C.P.R. also took feedback from Gibson Dunn on the proposed new rules, though it did not consult with the dashers’ lawyers.

DoorDash gets to try a few cases with this company to see if they like the results. That couldn't possibly create a conflict of interest.

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#15
post #10

This seems like fantastic news -- if class action suits aren't allowed, then technology now makes it easier to file "cookie cutter" arbitration suits at such low cost that it effectively acts like a small class-action suit anyways. But I'm worried companies will be able to respond in a way that neutralizes it -- tweaking arbitration terms somehow. I hope not, though. It is absolutely necessary that we hold companies…

In cases where the arbitration clause is already in place, and the arbitrations have been filed, that would likely be difficult to do, as a result of the Alsup ruling. Where the arbitrations haven't begun yet, there's certainly some scope for attempting to neutralize this, by changing provider or terms. Interestingly, there's a potential conflict-of-interest brewing [1] around whether DoorDash's lawyers were so tight…

Also the way cases will be brought seems like it would create perverse incentives on the rulings.

> The International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, or C.P.R., was willing to allow DoorDash to arbitrate “test cases” and avoid having to pay the fees all at once. C.P.R. also took feedback from Gibson Dunn on the proposed new rules, though it did not consult with the dashers’ lawyers.

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#16

As a European, reading these articles on arbitration, no-compete, required licenses, 'right-to-work', tipping, "gig work", firing over zoom, and so much more, it seems U.S. workers could really use some collective bargaining? Here unions are the obvious century-old solution to improve working conditions, why don't workers organize there? Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care?

> Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care? You don't hear as much about European problems online, because they're spoken about in the respective nation's language. This means that it's hard to compare. Most European countries also have many problems like the US. Maybe not to quite the same extreme, but they do exist. The US does have a few things going for it though: very strong protections of speech,…

"a very strong protections of speech"

I grew up in Canada, then moved to the US for 5 years before returning home to Canada. It always killed me when my US coworkers said teh same thing about "free speech" as i watched censored TV shows in the US which are not that way back in Canada.

I think "free speech" on the US side is highly overrarted and if you look into it more seriously you will find many nations which are at least at the US level. Some higher, like Canada, which doesnt have the "7 words you cant say on TV" restriction.

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#17
I wonder why the issue of being able to waive away your rights - forced arbitration, non-competes, severance packages etc. never come up at the presidential campaign stage.

Seems like this is pervasive enough to affect pretty much everyone. Or am I misunderstanding something here ?

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#18

As a European, reading these articles on arbitration, no-compete, required licenses, 'right-to-work', tipping, "gig work", firing over zoom, and so much more, it seems U.S. workers could really use some collective bargaining? Here unions are the obvious century-old solution to improve working conditions, why don't workers organize there? Are we just lucky here, like with universal health care?

because of shit like this: https://www.post-gazette.com/uncategorized/2006/03/31/Philly...

Re: A new weapon in arbitration: sheer volume

#20
post #2

> But a federal judge in San Francisco wasn’t willing to go along with it. The judge, William Alsup, ordered DoorDash in February to proceed with the American Arbitration Association cases and pay the fees. Ah! Gotta love judge Alsup. Back in SCO vs Novell, and in Oracle vs Google. > ... in a hearing, Judge Alsup questioned whether the company and its lawyers really believed that. > "Your law firm and all the defense…

Funny his middle name is Haskell
Post reply on HN