You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #9: And no binding precedents isn't the ONLY reason arbitration is BS. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-25-03 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. And no binding precedents isn't the ONLY reason arbitration is BS.
dsc, I invite you to make an argument that arbitration is better than a court of law based on any other logic besides, it's saves the HMOs money, and gives them a competitive advantage over their own customers.

The ONLY time arbitration makes any sense is when you have two parties which have exactly the same bargaining power. Two equal parties might prefer arbitration to save costs. To parties who aren't equal should never chose arbitration if they're able to make the choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC