commercial arbitration class 9

see notes in chapt 4.

case review of shaffer

case review of cole

armandariz: most important thing out of this type of case is that where there is an overt attempt to exclude remedies that would/should be available by statute, it is unlawful to use arbitration to exclude a remedy that is available by statute (for example,  attorney fees, limit remedy in a reinstatement employee case, recovery of backpay, emotional injury)

"only can pay type of expenses an employee would have to pay in court" - very limited and strict

have tried to set up in a jurisdiction that is not well known, like the floss case. the EE agree to bring their cases to this tribunal and the ER would be a 3dPB. usually tehse types of tribunals would not have the kind of protective policies that FINRA and AAA have.

due process protocol for EE/ER arb: joint work of the ABA and the AAA. ducks the issue of whether EEs should be held to mandatory arb of certain claims. but do discuss arb, keeping fees down, discovery, depositions (which the AAA actually didn't have anything about), neutral roster of trained arbitrators who know and are bound by applicable statutes

previously, in our study there was no duty to comply with the law. but still there's only limited judicial review, so there's still not a full adherence requirement to the law. arbitrators *should* apply the statutes at issue.

as we'll see it's not very thorough. but review the data, taht work place discrimination doesn't fair better or worse in or out of court than in arbitration.

MONDAY NOV 22 - review with arely!!!!!!