How People Voted
 |
 |
43% For, 57% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 3010, The Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
Comparing revision saved on July 13, 2007, 18:23:26 (webmaster), with revision saved on July 18, 2008, 19:49:39 (webmaster):
H.R. 3010 would amend chapter 1 of title 9 of United States Code with respect to arbitration.
== Detailed Summary ==
<summary>
(Log inArbitration Fairness Act of 2007 - Declares that no predispute arbitration agreement shall be valid or enforceable if it requires arbitration of: (1) an employment, consumer, or franchise dispute, or (2) a dispute arising under any statute intended to editprotect civil rights or to regulate contracts or transactions between parties of unequal bargaining power.
Declares, further, that the wiki and be the firstvalidity or enforceability of an agreement to providearbitrate shall be determined by a detailed summarycourt, under federal law, rather than an arbitrator, irrespective of whether the bill!)party resisting arbitration challenges the arbitration agreement specifically or in conjunction with other terms of the contract containing such agreement.
Exempts arbitration provisions in collective bargaining agreements from this Act.
</summary>
<!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->
== Status of the Legislation ==
<status>
Latest Major Action: 7/12/2007: Referred to7/15/2008: House committee.committee/subcommittee actions. Status: ReferredForwarded by Subcommittee to the HouseFull Committee on the Judiciary.by Voice Vote .
</status>
<!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->
== Points in Favor ==
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->
== Points Against ==
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Steve
July 23, 2007, 12:17am (report abuse)aka "the Voluntarily Entered Into Contract Repudiation Act"
James J. Armstrong
August 3, 2007, 2:45pm (report abuse)The enactment of this legislation is desperatedly needed. In my case the 5th Circuit concluded that Citigroup's Arbitration Policy was applicable to both employees and former employees. So quitting is not an option!!!
Rmosler
August 21, 2007, 12:15pm (report abuse)This is something that really needs to be passed.
NS
December 5, 2007, 2:57pm (report abuse)Finally the citizens of this country may get back their Constitutional rights. How could the Supreme Ct have allowed our 7th amendment right to be destroyed? Pray this legislation passes and Bush signs it.
RJG
January 5, 2008, 10:28am (report abuse)Like arguing anti-lobbying legislation to a lobbyist.
LM
June 30, 2008, 3:54pm (report abuse)Arbitration was supposed to be fair. But it's become a scam where NAF and others who rubberstamp all awards in favor of corporations for a $250 fees. Bush is in bed with Big Business. So wait for Obama to be president.
Jodie
June 30, 2008, 3:57pm (report abuse)These banks have killed the economy with greed. Repeal of Glass Steagall act and then this arbitration scam. They will go to any lengths to screw this bill, this country and the consumers. Republicans are in the pocket of big business and will never let consumers have their rights.
Joyce
July 23, 2008, 12:13am (report abuse)Most people don't really know what arbitration agreements really are...until you get burned and then you realize you didn't stand a chance from the beginning.
David Duree
July 25, 2008, 9:26pm (report abuse)The compensated arbitrators and arbitration organizations receive all of their repeat business from the corporate interests that write the agreements with arbitration clauses. Their business would dry up if the consumers frequently won.
chere
August 4, 2008, 3:37am (report abuse)If our congressmen &
every member of the House Judiciary Committee. Doesnt pass this bill this year I will not vote for them next term.
"We the People" are sick & tired of not having "fairness" as consumers!
Kyle
August 13, 2008, 8:56pm (report abuse)I’ve met with Rep Hank Johnson and as the President of net-ARB, the world’s only online arbitration company, and support changes to arbitration that will level the playing field for consumers. Unfortunately Hank Johnson is a trial lawyer and so are many of his supporters. This Bill does little to make justice more available or affordable to the masses and is a tax on business. One of the biggest problems with the current system is that arbitration is not regulated. If law makers really had the people in mind they would do as the name suggest and make arbitration fair, rather than eliminate it and subject consumers to the same circumstances that prompted mandatory arbitration clauses in the first place…the expensive and crowded court system.
Check out www.net-ARB.com for more information.
Dave, Esq.
September 29, 2008, 3:56pm (report abuse)It is amazing how many people speak out of turn -- i.e., without checking their facts or really giving much thought to the lucidity of their arguments or the lack thereof.
I have been involved in arbitration for 15 years representing employees, employers, unions, consumers, and companies. I have not seen any empirical analyses that purport to measure the "fairness" of arbitration. I have also never heard any sound arguments against arbitration.
This bill appears to be yet another example of emotionally driven legislation that does much to address the emotional angst of the electorate and little more.
Jaysen in response to Dave, Esq.
October 11, 2008, 9:01pm (report abuse)Dave,
It's sad you would chastise everyone about making poor arguments and specifically point out how they lack empirical analyses that measure the "fairness" of arbitration. Yet, you fail to provide any valuable empirical evidence to suggest anything to the contrary? Your response smells of bias given that this bill might reduce the amount of business you do in this area and how it would give people a choice to avoid your area of income. Moreover, you can't be serious to poo poo the concept of arbitration being unfair when it flies in the face of common sense given that if the arbitrators want to have a job again (i.e. get chosen as an arbitrator) then they better not rule against the repeat customers like the investment banks and credit companies that are requiring/robbing their customers of due process and right to choose a trial by their peers in a dispute. It appears you have nothing but more bueracratic puffery to spew empty of any true logic or substance.
Mark C
December 17, 2008, 11:27pm (report abuse)Passing this bill would be a giant step towards fairness. The FAA was never meant to be shield and cover for corporate wrongdoing.