The Unfair Attack on Arbitration: Harming Consumers by Eliminating a Proven Dispute Resolution System

Opponents of strong enforcement of arbitration agreements, as authorized by the Federal Arbitration Act, contend that arbitration is unfair and biased. The evidence is to the contrary. Study after study shows that consumers and employees fare as well, if not better, in arbitration than in court. Moreover, arbitration’s speed and low costs allow the resolution of many claims that would be impractical to litigate. While the arbitration process may not treat lawyers as well as drawn-out litigation does, it is a boon for consumers, and legislation or regulation to curtail it would only injure them by cutting off a fast and efficient means of dispute resolution.

Click here to read the full publication →