Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VRWCmember
Franken's amendment stops defense contractors from receiving federal funding if they use mandatory arbitration clauses that prevent victims of assault from going to court.

While I agree that litigation is misused and overused, the excerpt above, along with both of the following excerpts from a different article (link below) state that basically she signed away her right to seek civil damages. If we're relying on these articles to be accurate, then that is different from a requirement to first go to arbitration, and if not a satisfactory outcome, to litigation.

"Senator Al Franken pushed through an amendment on Tuesday that is designed to withhold defense contracts from companies like Halliburton if they prohibit their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.

After her safe return to the United States, she learned a fine-print clause in her KBR contract banned her from taking her case to court, instead forcing her into an "arbitration" process that would be conducted by KBR itself."

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_212260731.shtml

61 posted on 10/08/2009 5:20:47 PM PDT by floozy22 ("As government expands, liberty contracts." RWR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: floozy22
Knowing a little bit about these types of clauses from having had to negotiate terms and conditions with subcontractors and defense contractors, and knowing a little bit about the general laziness of reporters and editors to actually verify ANY facts rather than just accepting talking points at face value, I am extremely confident that the following phrases from the story(that you emphasized) are extremely INACCURATE:
"... prevent victims of assault from going to court."

"they prohibit their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court."

"a fine-print clause in her KBR contract banned her from taking her case to court"

No contract clause can prohibit you from filing charges for assault if you are the victim of assault. Such a clause would be illegal. Also, while contract clauses can limit your ability to sue your employer until you have first sought remedies via arbitration, such clauses cannot prohibit you from pursuing your further legal remedies once you have gone through the required arbitration process.
62 posted on 10/09/2009 8:00:41 AM PDT by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson