As noted in a marvelous on-line LA Times piece, mandatory arbitration clause abuse has reached a new high. Or is that low?

Peggy Garrity writes about the terrible case of the woman who claimed to have been drugged and raped by her co-workers while employed in Iraq by KBR, the contractor and former Halliburton subsidiary. Read it. And then try to defend the outcome. Here’s the url:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-oe-garrity3mar03,0,5040973.story

The sad piece is that the judge felt compelled to order arbitration because the contract signed by the woman purported to require arbitration of her claims for sexual harassment and sexual assault. This after the woman was held in isolation in a freight container and after medical evidence obtained by a doctor mysteriously disappeared.

I suppose it’s naive to hope for a Popeye moment (”That’s all I cans stand, ’cause I can’t stands no more”) from a federal judge. But still, that thin hope springs, even for those of us horribly jaundiced by the day to day in the trenches. When the judge couldn’t go so far as to say, “Enough,” in this case, it sent a message to all the corporate interests that push form contract clauses. All bets are officially off when you can “waive” your right to a jury trial in a rape case.

You’ve signed them too, I imagine, as they’re buried in that credit card offer, cable circular, or the employment agreement that you signed. What’s horrifying is that they offer no choices to employees and consumers. You want the job? You surrender your rights. End of story.

If this one isn’t extreme enough for a court to refuse arbitration, we’re in for a hell of a lot of hurt before we get this thing turned around.

David F. Sugerman

Tags: employment, mandatory arbitration, sex abuse