What shall I do about this mandatory binding arbitration agreement my employer tells me I must sign?

ILX legal scholars (and non-legal scholars), I would appreciate your thoughts on this.

I'm thinking it is bullshit and I'm gonna dig my heels in.

Do you need the job more than the job needs you?

I am not a legal scholar, but ... unless you have the time/money/energy to mount a lawsuit against this employer in the event you're mistreated, then having binding arbitration kinda benefits you as much as it does them, right?

Dunno, that's why I'm asking for opinions. I mean yeah of course they are completely entitled to fire me if I don't sign, but that seems a little ridic and surely would be bad for employee morale and such?

If they fired me over it, that is.

Anyone else have to sign one of these things?

what line of work/industry are you in??

Well, you should listen to what a lawyer says ahead of me, but here are the two points that come to my mind:

- If you don't have an arbitration agreement, and you feel you've been mistreated on the job (harassed, discriminated against, fired without cause), and the employer disagrees, you would probably wind up in a situation where you have to ask yourself: do I have the energy and resources to go find a lawyer and spend years of my life pressing this or filing a suit? And if the answer is "no, I would probably just curse and find a new job," then an arbitration agreement actually benefits you, because it's an easier way to press your complaint and get some limited redress out of it. The only way I can imagine it hurting you is if you think there's a real chance this employer will mistreat you in some way that's so huge and egregious that it'd be worthwhile for you to file suit over it. Which leads to the more important thing:

- You should probably ask yourself what the likelihood is of your having a serious employment dispute with these people in the first place, and whether that likelihood makes it worth the consequences of stink-making over the arbitration agreement.

I mean, I don't know what you do or what your job is, but unless you think you're going to be there for a long time, and unless you think there's a chance some Really Very Serious employment dispute is going to come up, I'm not sure how important it is to avoid arbitration and reserve the right to go to court on anything. . . .

Well I think there is about a 0% chance that anything would come up with my employer (or its "officers, directors, employees, agents. . . and all affiliated entities, all benefit polans, the benefit plans' sponosors, fiduciaries, blah blah blah), but it's really the principle of the think. I mean why sign away my constitutional rights (note: that was a rhetorical question). Also, I am cynical and figure that my employer is doing this because it benefits the company first and foremost, and really why should I forsake MY rights for ITS convenience?

Perhaps these are childish arguments but part of me is really irritated by this. I HAVE RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, PPL! DON'T PRESSURE ME INTO SIGNING THEM AWAY.

I have signed such things.

A friend of mine just crosses out the bits of contracts he doesn't like. He's never been called on it, so to speak.

Wonder how airtight this stuff is considering no compete clauses aren't really enforceable anymore

If it's just THAT, then I don't know how meaningful stink-making is here.

I mean, look, their response to you would probably be that your fundamental rights don't change here -- you're still working under the same contract and the same relevant laws. The only thing that changes is the venue where disagreements would be worked out: instead of a judge or a civil court, it'll be with an arbitrator, which is faster, cheaper, and more efficient. Yes, it also benefits them by protecting them from sudden massive jury verdicts and whatnot. But it also benefits you, by making it slightly easier for you to press a grievance. And like I said, you are far more likely to wind up in the position of "is this worth taking to court" than the position of "I have an open-and-shut discrimination case that I want in front of a court."

Just check the details of the agreement. If they give you a choice of arbitrators, and the arbitrators are recognized and reliable firms, and there's a fair-sounding appeals process involved, then I wouldn't worry about it too much. You don't seem to expect to have any dispute with them anyway, and if you did, there's nothing about your rights as an employee that can't be pressed with an arbitrator the same way they could be with a court. (So far as I understand the process.)

But people who know about law/arbitration can feel free to tell me if I'm talking out of my ass here . . .

i only know a little about litigation v. arbitration but yeah i think the whole faster/cheaper argument in regards to arbitration is OTM

You are all speaking a lot of sense but I love the romantic view of JURY OF MY PEERS.

I will look over the agreement in more detail. I like the idea of going line by line and crossing out bits that I think are really over the top.

I can't remember if I had to sign one of these at my current job, but I signed one every time I worked at a retail or restaurant job as a kid. I know that it didn't stop me from receiving the benefits from a class-action suit at one of those jobs.

q, i can't evaluate this from a legal standpoint, not knowing much about the area (other than a vague awareness that, as jon noted, there may be questions of enforceability of a mandatory arbitration provision in a larger employment contract, including in the class action context, but also that such provisions are becoming fairly commonplace), or give you legal advice. but as a practical mater, i think that nabisco's point that there may well be some benefit to you (and others) in such a clause is a good one. i also think that you have some justification in feeling that such clauses should not be forced upon employees. i think the question to ask is how much to weigh the impact on the universe (or your feelings of doing right) of your standing up for that principle (in light of my notes above about how the courts are also weighing the issue) vs. the weight of the impact on your employment situation. you may well be right that your employer would simply fold - what is your bargaining power within the organization? however, and this is probably obvious, you should consider that your refusal to sign is a refusal to cooperate with your employer, an act of rebellion of sorts, and, even if they do nothing, they may think of you differently. it may help to couch your objection in the terms you have here - as a statement not about your employer, but reflecting your strong belief in the court system for all - or it may not.

as something of an aside, it's unclear to me whether this is an agreement you have been asked to sign in the course of employment, or as part of a contract in entering a new job. if the former, are others being asked to sign?

hth,
gab

Thanks gab, good things to ponder.

I've been with this employer for two years and all employees--those who have been here for ages and those just coming on--are to sign the agreement. I do belive that one should choose one's battles carefully and that this perhaps does not rate me putting up a big stink. But it does rankle me, again not because I have anything against my employer, but because I just really think our justice system is super awesome in theory, if not in practice, and by signing an arbitration agreement I would feel somehow *unfaithful* to that system. This is naive and stupid I realize but hey, we all have our quirks.

What if you don't sign and do the Tina-Fey-as-Sarah-Palin "PEW PEW PEW!" if asked about it?

dude are you calling my wife a moose hunter

haha no! I am advocating the "get adorable when cornered" strategem!