Like a lot of things, the binding arbitration clauses in some contracts here in Califonria was a good idea in its inception, and was meant to solve some serious problems of backlog in our court system, by getting people to sit down and negotiate settlements of actual wrongs. They do not absolutely preclude access to the court system, its just that it takes longer to get there, and has to be based on one party showing that the arbitrator was not competent or was biased. Many of the arbitrators are in fact retired state court judges. Labor unions have actually bargained to have the clauses in some of their contracts with employers since arbitration cases are NOT public record as a court suit is. HMMMMMM!!
The advantage to these was that most people got adequate compensation for monetary losses quickly, and the level of proof of the damages was lower and simpler than it is in the courts, but there is no room for damages such as emotional harm or punitive damages where a cost cannot be easily determined in the system. The Bill here does not do away with ALL mandatory arbitration contracts, but I am happy to see it enacted for what it does. Hatred can never arbitrate in good faith. You do not sign away all of the rights with this type of contract, but you exchange specific rights which may take years to end up in your pockets for quick cash even if it is less than you may or may not get from a jury.
