[17th Miss Regt]

So how do we cram this decision down the throats of liberals?

[G Larry]

Appeal it!

Every damn company in the nation has these arbitration clauses.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

I think I agree with the decision. People shouldn't have to sign their legal rights away in order to work for a corporation. The fact that Hobby Lobby went even further in requiring employees to sign their rights away without any compensation in the form of support from national labor law is even more abusive.

And those who say "Well if you don't like the way that company is set up, then go apply to another" are living in some sort of dream world where good jobs grow on trees.

[PAR35]

Hope it expands to eventually kill all arbitration clauses in contracts of adhesion.

If a contract has an arbitration clause, it’s clear evidence that the other party is planning on screwing you over.

[Ray76]

A National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge Executive Branch Agency Employee ruled that agreements signed by employees of...

Just saying

[Amendment10]

Thank you for referencing that article markomalley. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

"A National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge ruled ..."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

If I understand the issue correctly, regardless what FDR’s activist justices wanted everybody to think about scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specfic power to regulate intrastate commerce.

”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

And even if the states had constitutionally delegated such powers to feds, note that the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected federal bureaucrats like those running the NLRB and the EPA. So Congress has a constitutional “monopoly” on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not imo.

In fact, by delegating federal legislative / regulatory powers to nonelected bureaucrats, powers that the states have never delegated to Congress, Congress is wrongly protecting such powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of Sections 1-3 referenced above.

The bottom line is that this official action by the NLRB is another example where the corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification Senate failed to protect the states and the people as the Founding States had intended for the Senate to do. In this case the Senate failed to kill bills which established the NLRB and appropriated funds to run the NLRB.

The ill-conceived 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators, and non-elected bureaucrats using government power to push their private agendas along with it.

[lewislynn]

You talk to a lawyer about your case. He tells you it's a slam dunk. No problem. You can't lose. You give him a check

Court date rolls around and as you're walking through the doors into the court room your lawyer says "I hope the judge is in a good mood, this case could go either way".

So the next time you go the arbitrator route. You go in the conference room, sit around the table for a few hours and at the end of the day ALL the attorneys (including yours) along with the arbitrator go to the bar for cocktails before they have dinner together...You aren't invited...but you are paying.

On your way home you remember the arbitrator is the judge, now retired, that you lost to the time you went the court route.