Arbitration has long served as an invaluable resource for solving disputes, especially the vast majority of small-dollar consumer suits that lawyers wouldn't -- and won't -- take.
But it generally does not have to be done with the services of a trial lawyer, which is why plaintiffs' lawyers have been trying to cripple consumer arbitration, Lisa Rickard, president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, wrote in a column on the organization's web site.
One of the largest arbitration firms in the nation has agreed to cease all consumer arbitrations as a result of a lawsuit; another firm halted consumer debt collection arbitrations pending a review of their practices and procedures.
But, Rickard writes, "For arbitration's opponents, ensuring that consumers can go to court is not the end goal. It is actually the first step of a two-step dance at the plaintiffs' lawyer prom.
"The second step is to allow these consumer cases to become large class actions -- the kind that are famous for making a relatively few plaintiffs' lawyers rich while giving the consumer masses pennies on the dollar, or even coupons, for their trouble.
"But here's the ultimate truth about consumer lawsuits -- the vast majority of consumer disputes are inherently dissimilar and not eligible for class certification."
The Civil Justice Association of California supports arbitration as a fair, cost effective, and efficient method of resolving disputes and has urged Governor Schwarzenegger to sign Assembly Bill 1 (Monning), which would allow teachers to use their independent study time to study arbitration mediation and conflict resolution.
Assembly Bill 1 - Letter to Governor.pdf
Also, watch Kim Stone, CJAC's Vice President-Legislation, testify on AB 1 here.