Not to say we told you so, but enter Chipotle. Back in 2013, Chipotle employees began to sue for wage theft. The employees claimed that the company had policies that made them start work before clocking in, and made them clock out before finishing work. Essentially they were required to work without pay. They brought a class action eventually consisting of approximately 10,000 employees.
Did Chipotle respond by changing its policies and paying the employees what they were owed? Of course not. Instead, in 2014, it stuck an arbitration clause in its employment contract for all new employees and kept doing the same thing. Then it asked the court to dismiss from the case all the workers who were required to sign the arbitration agreements. And, because of the Supreme Court’s decision in Epic Systems, the district court in the Chipotle case dismissed more than 2,800 Chipotle workers from the suit. If those people want the money they earned, each one of them has to take Chipotle to secret arbitration.
The Chipotle case is still proceeding for the 7,000 or so employees in the suit who joined before Chipotle started forcing the arbitration clause on new hires. But this case shows the power and value of arbitration clauses to companies. Instead of paying its employees for the hours they worked, Chipotle could simply write up an arbitration clause and make new employees sign it. Then, even if it stole their wages, even if a federal court finds that it stole their coworkers’ wages using universally-applied policies, they will each have to go to secret arbitration if they want to get what they’re owed.
The US constitution is outdated and needs a rewrite. Arbitration clauses are just one of many perverse, unintended effects stemming from an absolutist constitution. The idea of absolute,...
The US constitution is outdated and needs a rewrite.
Arbitration clauses are just one of many perverse, unintended effects stemming from an absolutist constitution.
The idea of absolute, individual rights is a relic of the 18th century: even the world's second oldest written constitution still in effect (Norway, 1814) has realized this.
I don't understand why many Americans find this point of view controversial, but that seems to be the case.
With the current, vague and unspecific constitution the law on the books that courts have to rule against, judges have way more political power in practice than a divided congress. That's a democratic problem.
You cannot do that without the white Conservative electorate, if the Americans want to correct their constitution they need to depolarize the political debate. That is why I think all radicals (of...
The US constitution is outdated and needs a rewrite.
You cannot do that without the white Conservative electorate, if the Americans want to correct their constitution they need to depolarize the political debate. That is why I think all radicals (of the right or of the left) are pushing the country into the status quo.
The US constitution is outdated and needs a rewrite.
Arbitration clauses are just one of many perverse, unintended effects stemming from an absolutist constitution.
The idea of absolute, individual rights is a relic of the 18th century: even the world's second oldest written constitution still in effect (Norway, 1814) has realized this.
I don't understand why many Americans find this point of view controversial, but that seems to be the case.
With the current, vague and unspecific constitution the law on the books that courts have to rule against, judges have way more political power in practice than a divided congress. That's a democratic problem.
You cannot do that without the white Conservative electorate, if the Americans want to correct their constitution they need to depolarize the political debate. That is why I think all radicals (of the right or of the left) are pushing the country into the status quo.