vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
 ·Comcast
| reply to Skeedatl
Re: Nothing new
The study is here »www.citizen.org/documents/Final_wcover.pdf and it was 94%, not 97 - my mistake.
I have no problem with mandatory arbitration - if the company handling the arbitration doesn't have a relationship with either party. |
|
Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud | I wonder who funds that think tank. |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | Why don't you spend some time wondering who funds the arbitrators? And how can an arbitrator that's paid BY a company be neutral when handling that company's disputes? |
|
Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud
·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·MegaPath
 ·Cox VOIP
·Verizon west (ex G..
·ViaTalk
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
edit:
March 19th, @02:18PM
| said by vpoko  :Why don't you spend some time wondering who funds the arbitrators? And how can an arbitrator that's paid BY a company be neutral when handling that company's disputes? Cause I know who funds them (arbitrators) and its' easy to be neutral.
In my business I pay my worker's comp auditor, ISO auditor, and a few others and they tell me to fix stuff and I don't fire them for it.
Meanwhile I always follow the money no matter who is telling their story. |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
·Comcast
| said by Skeedatl :Meanwhile I always follow the money no matter who is telling their story. No, you're obviously not following the money going to arbitrators. Why can an arbitrator remain neutral, even though it's in their interest to rule towards the company that hires them, but a think tank must have an agenda influenced by the source of their funding.
Sounds like you have a double standard when it comes to following the money. |
|
Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·MegaPath
·Cox VOIP
·Verizon west (ex G..
·ViaTalk
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| As I stated, just because the company pays them doesn't automatically mean they aren't neutral. In the course of my business pay auditors (the closest think to arbitrators I use) who are neutral. No problem.
No double standard. I always follow the money. Arbitration is far better that subscribers giving millions to greedy bloodsucking lawyers because the ISP blows up a notebook. |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
·Comcast
| said by Skeedatl :As I stated, just because the company pays them doesn't automatically mean they aren't neutral. In the course of my business pay auditors (the closest think to arbitrators I use) who are neutral. No problem. Sure it's a problem, remember Arthur Anderson? That's why we have the Sarbanes-Oxley Act now, to try to prevent auditors from getting in bed with the companies they're hired to audit. We need the same thing for arbitration.
Would you be opposed to the consumer choosing the arbitrator, with the loser paying the costs? |
|
Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud | I would love nothing more than a loser pays system. It will fix everything from heathcare to patent trolling. |
|
