"Moving the Ball Forward" in Consumer and Employment Dispute Resolution: What Can Planning, Talking, Listening and Breaking Bread Together Accomplish?

Authors

Nancy A. Welsh, Texas A&M University School of LawFollow
David B. Lipsky

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

3-2013

Journal Title

Dispute Resolution Magazine

ISSN

1077-3592

Abstract

Article Extract:

Mandatory pre-dispute arbitration has been a divisive issue for many years, particularly since the Supreme Court began enforcing the arbitration clauses that businesses and employers impose on consumers and employees, respectively, in contracts of adhesion. In 2009, the Dispute Resolution Section’s Council proposed to weigh in on this issue through the vehicle of an ABA House of Delegates resolution. The compromise position developed by the Section, expressing support for pre-dispute mandatory arbitration clauses provided they offer a meaningful opt-out, generated such a firestorm of opposition from both pro-arbitration and anti-arbitration advocates that the Council ultimately chose to abstain from expressing any position at all.

First Page

14

Last Page

19

Num Pages

6

Volume Number

19

Issue Number

3

Publisher

American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution

Recommended Citation

Nancy A. Welsh & David B. Lipsky, "Moving the Ball Forward" in Consumer and Employment Dispute Resolution: What Can Planning, Talking, Listening and Breaking Bread Together Accomplish?, 19 Disp. Resol. Mag. 14 (2013).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/995

File Type

PDF