Behave in what way? Insisting on impanelling arbitrators?
Honestly, what do you think goes on at an arbitration panel? Three mostly former judges or current attorneys donning on their satanic best and reenacting the end of Rosemary’s Baby?
HAIL SATAN!! HAIL SATAN!!
Well obviously one thing that goes on is the attempt to deny rape victims a day in court and prevent them from talking about it.
All snark aside: Do you know what arbitration is?
Gang rape is a felony. Halliburton/KBR used its employment agreement to cover up a felony. This is obscene. Do you REALLY want corporate contracts to cover up felonies? How about if Halliburton/KBR put out a contract on your life? Will you still hide behind your artificial construct and claim it falls under the contract?
US law has long held that it still counts for US citizens when they are offshore. That’s why we can’t bribe foreign officials. And it should be why we cannot commit offenses against US laws, even when in a virtually-lawless land.
An arbitration board is NOT a court of law. Its rulings are limited and only affect the accused regarding his contract. To compare that with a US court of law is preposterous.
Of course. Do you think that gang rape is something that should fall under a binding arbitration agreement?
Also, how about murder? What’s the line?
She’s suing KBR for gang-rape? :dubious:
Of course she isn’t. She’s suing them for (I presume) false imprisonment, IIED, negligent hiring and sexual harassment. The latter can, and often is, handled by arbitration panelists. The first three are torts outside of the employment contract, and no court hereto has compelled their submission to arbitration. KBR appealed the trial court’s decision to that effect and the Fifth Circuit affirmed (I suppose it is hear where you will shriek “Justice delayed is justice denied” and prefer to speak out of both sides of you mouth–avenging Jones’ right to the courthouse door while simultaneously barring it to those horrid bugbears, corporations).
No. I think there’s a lot not to love about arbitration. But I think piecemeal, desultory alterations to our structural jurisprudence regarding the administration of justice–and it is not only that, but also accompanied by hysterical fever-dreams about how voting against these changes is a vote for gang-rape–is even unlovelier.
So the answer is yes, you think gang rape should be covered by secret arbitration.
All snark aside: Do you know what the precedential value of trial court opinions are?
They are limited and only affect the, ahem, parties (we don’t call them “the accused” in civil court) regarding their contract.
still better than secret arbitration.
Why do you want to give my money to these pigs?
Nope, Dio. Nobody thinks that. But Roger Ailes sure is impressed with you.
ETA: Speaking of Fox News, it’s by now pretty apparent that you’re not really knowledgeable about this area of the law, nor are you interested in learning about it, especially if it challenges your partisan preconceptions. So, like our Prez and Fox News, I’m kicking you out of the conversation. I won’t be engaging any more of your posts on this topic.
That’s a might impressive pile of lawyer shit there, but at the bottom, it’s about a company hding gang rape and denying a victim her day in court. Who do you think you’re bullshitting here?
If the arbitration clause is going to be overruled by a court anyway, why does a company bother to put it in a contract? Why did they appeal the original ruling against them? You seem to be arguing that existing law is cut-and-dried as to what can be arbitrated and what can’t. So, why should the government award contracts to a company that would waste four years of the court’s time fighting a well-established law they aren’t going to win?
And that’s in addition to the moral arguments and the actual crimes committed.
The gummint still does business with this company because of connections. I mean, it’s not like they were the lowest bidder or anything…
The employment discrimination/sexual harassment related claims will proceed to arbitration. For claims arising out of a contract with a valid arbitration clause, federal policy (since 1925) is pretty cut-and-dried: arbitration is favored.
The intentional torts, however, were not included in the subject matter of the employment contract and, thus, there is no arbitration of them to be had.
As far as why did it take so long? I don’t have the trial transcript. You have to imagine though, the facts are sui generis, I can’t imagine that there was much prior case law on all fours with the case at bar.
So it should be no big deal for companies to meet the provisions of this amendment and still qualify for government contracts. It’s one more reason for them to do what the law will force them to do eventually, anyway.
I have no problem with the government awarding contracts to companies that willingly obey the law, and withholding them from companies that have to be dragged tooth-and-nail into living up to their legal obligations.
That senator should argue that the legislation is overly broad in scope and note that his opposition is based on said overly broad scope. He should not announce that he’s voting against the amendment because it’s “a political attack directed at Halliburton”, as Jeff Sessions (R-Hell) did.
If you (or anyone else) can show me where any of the thirty nay voters raised your argument, rather than lamely suggesting that the amendment represents a witch hunt against Halliburton, I will personally withhold my scorn for said Senator(s) and maybe work up a little extra for the others.
Incidentally, I know this is the Pit and all, but let’s look at the actual text of the amendment, shall we?
So the amendment prohibits federal contractors from requiring their employees or independent contractors to submit to arbitration only in Title VII claims or torts relating to sexual assault or harassment. Curiously, these are, as far as I can tell, the exact grounds on which Jamie Leigh Jones’ suit was based. In other words, the amendment could hardly have been any more narrow in scope if it said, “oh, and only for Jamie Leigh Jones. Everyone else is fucked.”
Side question: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not mention independent contractors, only employees. Has it been interpreted to cover independent contractors as well?
Well, since they were the only bidder, I guess technically they were the lowest bidder.
Might want to start taking gingko or something, because your memory is faulty. Somebody posted a link to the story/pictures in the middle of a thread about actual pictures of US soldiers raping captives, and nobody took them seriously.
Furthermore: 1) You can offer an amendment to an amendment, right? This is a genuine question.