Google Will End Forced Arbitration For Employees (cnet.com)

Google said it will no longer require current and future staff to go through mandatory arbitration for disputes with the company. "The change goes into effect on March 21," reports CNET. "The search giant will also remove mandatory arbitration from its own employment agreements with contract and temporary staff, though the change won't impact staffing firms." From the report: This comes after Google employees in November walked out of their offices to protest the company's handling of sexual harassment claims. One of their demands was to end forced arbitration in cases of sexual harassment and discrimination. In January, some Google employees launched a social media campaign to pressure the company and other tech companies to drop mandatory arbitration. Mandatory arbitration often means workers can't take their employers to court when they complain internally. The campaign organizers said 60 million Americans are affected by forced arbitration.

Comments

Free at last!!

[youngone]

Why would forced arbitration even be legal?

Re:Free at last!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why ask rhetorical questions?

Re:Free at last!!

[gumpish]

give the employees a choice of a dozen different arbiters that Google feels are fair players, and let those arbiters fight it out for employee preference by competing on the most fair dealings for employees

Why would it be in a business's interest to use fair arbiters?
Why would arbiters, who rely on corporate defendants (not aggrieved individuals) for repeat business, be motivated to render fair findings rather than findings which favor the company?
Why do nearly all contracts which require mandatory binding arbitration also specify that the results of arbitration must remain secret?
As much as you hate the idea, governments have a larger role to play than simply providing for the national defense.

Re:Free at last!!

[nzkbuk]

It's not forced, it's agreed upon contractually.

In all practical effects most contract negotiations boil down to If you want a job with us you will sign our employment contract, we will not enter into negotiation If that's not effectively the same as "forced" I don't know what is.
The exception to the above rule tends to be at C level.

Given that you need a job to buy food to live

[rsilvergun]

then yeah, it's forced. Especially when nearly all employers do it. Google's one of the top employers so good luck getting a job with them to escape forced arbitration.

And this begs the question, should you be able to sell yourself into slavery then? If you're willing to say yes then at least your consistent, though on some level you must realize that if you're selling yourself into slavery then you're not in a position to make fair contracts. Anymore than a child would be.

Re:Given that you need a job to buy food to live

[Waccoon]

But... but... you can still work for an employer who doesn't do this stuff. The free market will take care of itself. Honest!

It's shocking how hard it is to find a EULA that doesn't have a binding arbitration cause. It only took a few years for everyone to start doing it.

Re:Good.

[Waccoon]

Of course corporations should have a monopoly on efficiency and strength in numbers. We can't have the commoners using the same techniques as a business to make their causes practical or even viable.

Even back in the 90's, I remember each employer showing me anti-union videotapes as a standard hiring procedure. I never thought I'd see the day when arbitration became widely tolerated, let alone people believing that unions are universally bad.

Re:Good.

[TheGratefulNet]

let alone people believing that unions are universally bad.
big religion gives a side-channel to peoples' brains.

they get brainwashed by their churches (mostly republican based) and they vote against their own best interestes.

the R's are masters at this. evil as all fuck, but masters nonetheless.

unions are a balance of power. but the R's (that have a policy of being entirely pro-business and anti-consumer) convince their base that allowing unions is somehow 'anti american' and jesus will punish you for this (I'm not kidding; the thinking processes of most party republicans are broken and this is really how they see the world). this is why 'we can't have nice things'. the authoritarians ruin shit for the rest of us.