I May Lose My Job For This :(
[please note the update at the bottom of the post]
So, I work (and have for over 5 years) for a large cable company, which will remain nameless at this point, though, may become self-evident. On all of our work orders now for the past year there is a section that the customer must initial to indicate acknowledgement that they allow the company to resolve disputes through arbitration and give up “various rights including a trial by jury”. Of all the other technicians I’ve talked to thus far, none of them have even read what they are told to have the customers sign.
[Un?]Fortunately I have actually read (and firmly stand by and support) both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and find that this disallowance of adjudication violates the 6th amendment to the US Constitution (part of the Bill of Rights) in which I was under the impression that these are inalienable rights bestowed upon everyone, a mere cable service company hasn’t the right to make you succumb.
[Un?]Fortunately I have, my entire life, been blessed with a ridiculous and crippling spirit to fight what I feel is wrong. Since the implementation of this work order, where the customer is to indicate that they understand this I have always put “#6” preventing them from accidentally indicating any acknowledgement of such policy, and for about a year now, certainly many hundreds of work orders, I have had such practice, and it has finally come to the attention of my boss’s boss. He then copied a work order of one of my jobs and placed a post-it note on it saying “what does #6 mean?” in which he gave to my immediate supervisor. My supervisor asked me what it was about and nearly had an aneurism when I plainly told him of my intent. For some reason (decadence?) he, like most others would have been, was absolutely flabbergasted. “You realize you could lose your job, right?” he asked. And without batting and eyelash I said yes. After much ‘back and forth’ I said that I was willing to put my neck on the chopping block for the sake of people I don’t even know, and apparently this sort of statement was absolutely unheard of, or at least forgotten. And I stand by that and will until this is all played out, no matter where it goes.
I feel as if none of us read the paperwork we are presented in which to sign. In my five years of employment and requiring work order signatures I have had only one person that wanted to read it first. That we just sign what is necessary to get what it is that we desire. Though a dangerous practice, I feel that those that request our signature are equally oblivious to it, elsewise some of them may bring it to our attention. The way I handled it was to not even bring it to their attention, so that they would have no accountability, because they shouldn’t. No one that is just receiving cable services (tv, internet, digital phone) needs to be worrying about whether or not they are giving up ‘inalienable’ rights… it’s CABLE! I feel as if the company takes advantage of people in this way so that if there is a dispute the customer will have no leg to stand on, as they have given up their rights to a trial, leaving the verdict not to a Judge, nor Jury, but to the very company seeking claim.
Anyhow… after much background and digression… I go against the boss’s boss in 3 days time. Standing by what I told my boss and have illustrated here. Sadly having not investigated the legitimacy of whether or not they even have legal right to do this, nor really caring. I had, in the past, emailed what Constitutional Lawyers I could find online, receiving the generic ‘I can’t really say anything’ prevention of accreditation line back. But whether or not, in my, perhaps flawed, view, they, nor anyone else, can make you give up your Constitutional Rights by either will or force, and I will not be a catalyst in which to allow this to happen. I may very well lose my job, and in turn my home, my Family, and possessions via needs of sale or pawn, but I will NEVER lose my dignity, nor the satisfaction of knowing that I did what was right and stood up for the rights of many hundreds of complete strangers, as this is humanity in its rawest form, bestowed unto us all, and can NEVER be taken away, only forfeited.
[update 06/04/11 evening]
Thank you to everyone who has commented on this, especially those with positive things to say, but also to the rest. Not only on this page, but also to the many hundreds on the reddit page.
As it turns out I was ignorantly referencing the 6th amendment, and I was wrong. The 6th amendment is for criminal cases. It’s the 7th amendment of which is for civil cases. I do apologize for my mistake. 90% of the statements against what I’d done were because I got the two confused in memory, and should have double-checked the facts of which amendment first before putting my energy into tying to find out whether they had the right to do that or not.
So, to clear it up: It’s the 7th amendment of which is for civil cases. I wish there were a way to get all of the readers back to see the clarification, and, sadly, now the steam of this article has considerably subsided. Thank you again to all that have expressed an interest, be it positive or negative, in this matter.
[update 06/06/11]
The verdict is in: I am not getting fired. I am to not do it again.
I love you and what you stand for. This post, if legitimate, will be made a model to be followed by all those I can influence to do so.
Good luck.
Hey man, appreciate you standing tall, but know that any …ANY lawyer worth his weight is going to get that arbitration clause thrown out as an “adheison Contract”….meaning, its a take it or leave it contract, since Cox, TWC, etc..were in a superior bargaining power they allowed no room for negotiation and therefore the contract is not valid. I could go into case law but its not worth it, I personally have gotten that clause knocked out of rental company contracts and car insurance contracts and I don’t believe its much different here.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. You are a hero among us!
Thank you.
Ok…one more time…the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are talking about the GOVERNMENT. The 6th Amendment prevents the government from taking away your rights to a jury trial. It does not affect nor address the ability of a private company to determine how a civil (as in Not Criminal) matter will be dealt with.
You are free to disagree with the company’s policy, but trying to hide behind the Constitution is just ignorant.
To further my point, if I were a company owner I could legally do the following: * Prevent you from bringing a firearm onto my property and fire you if you try. * Fire you for saying unkind things about the company even if they are true. * Require you to submit to a search of your belongings while you are on my property and fire you if you refuse.
And so forth. All of those things are covered in the Bill of Rights, which means that the Government can’t do them. And there are a number of laws passed by the legislature at the Federal, State, and local levels that mimic ideas in the Bill of Rights to make them apply to private businesses (such as Equal Employment Opportunity, which would prevent a business owner from firing you for not believing in their religion) but those things have nothing to do with the Constitution.
I hate to see this guy lose his job in this economy, but he should have gone to his boss and talked about what options he had within the company to get the rule changed rather than try to use the Constitution as a shield in a matter where it had no bearing.
End of rant.
The lawsuits in this particular situation wouldn’t be those against the company, but against the subscribers. For instance- our DVR boxes cost us about $600. So let us say that your house is robbed, and your DVR, for whatever reason, is stolen, the company can say “well, sorry about your luck, but you’re going to have to give us $600”. Yes, I am the kind of sucker that gives people, naively, the benefit of the doubt. But these things do happen. In the first quarter our company profited over 3.4BILLION dollars. If a few people can produce a police report showing that their residence was robbed, then I would assume, again naively, that we could give them the benefit of the doubt. But apparently compassion has no place in business.
If i lend you an 600 dollar piece of equipment and while in your care it falls and smashes, it gets knocked over and smashes, it get’s picked up by a robber and smashes, it jumps on a plane and smashes, it gets run over by a car and smashes, it gets fall down drunk after finding your stash of vintage whiskey and smashes.
I would expect you to replace that equipment. It was in your care, we agreed you were care for it and it now uncared for.
But aside from that we have this agreement on how disagreements will be settled.
You could have very easily made each customer aware of the box, by calmly and without bias just explaining the box. I think importantly too is that you signed the box, you took each customers own right away to agree or disagree with that box, it was their place to sign and give their various consents.
You goals are noble and I’ve gotten in a shit lot of trouble trying to do the right thing just like this. But it’s hard to remember to be humble and give even our bosses and our co-workers the benefit of the doubt.
If people in general were more honest with eachother; people in groups ( which is all a company is ) would be more trusting of eachother and the #6 box wouldn’t be on that form. All you can really be is an example sometimes, and while it doesn’t flash with hutzbah there is an incipient hope when people who can be looked up to are our peers.
This is woefully utopian to think he could go to his superiors and actually reason things out. He did the right thing and he fought the good fight. You’d rather interpret laws instead of interpret rational thought and so you will be held down forever.
Actually, you are wrong in stating that the bill of rights has nothing to say about matters between private entities. This guy is citing the wrong part of the bill of rights, but the ideas he is talking about are still there. Under the SEVENTH Amendment, the right to trial by jury in suits of common law in matters in excess of $20 shall be preserved. The case law shows that if one private party takes another private party to court and the required elements of the 7th amendment are met, then the parties are entitled to a trial by jury. That being said, you are absolutely right regarding rights of businesses (or any private entities for that matter) and the right to contract would probably outweigh the rights to the 7th amendment if both parties agreed to wave that right. What he should have done is explained to the customers what their signature and initials signified and left the choice for them to agree to a contract up to them.
Hey shi*head, why don’t you leave interpretation of the constitution to EXPERTS who actually have the necessary training and intellectual ability to do so, like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman? You sound like one of them liberl mf’s who think the 2nd ammenment doesn’t give me the right to own a god damned bazooka and carry it tucked into my shorts if I want to whenever and wherever i please, just because some idiot liberals started some crzy rumor that the 2nd A also said something about a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of the state. Fortunately we have mental giants like Scalia and Kenneday who know how to PROPERLY AND LEGALLY ignore the parts of the constituion that we TRUE AMERICANS don’t like, if there even are any such parts actually in there, which I DOUBT THERE ARE. Whenever I read one of them confusing explanations like yours, I just grab my guns and my religion and run for the hills, cause nobody with any COMMON SENSE really knows what all that high brow shit means anyway. That’s why I rely on experts like Palin and Bahcman, along with Joe the Plumber and this cable guy. I’m glad Bachman wants to lead constitution classes for Congress, because she is someone who knows what the hell she is talking about when it comes to the constitution. Any idiot could go to Columbia for undergrad, then go to Harvard law, and then get a dim wit tenured profesorship in constitutional law at a half-assed university like Chicago – what this country needs is REALLY smart people like her and Sarah Palin spouting off bout the constitution and leading classes on it for Congress so idiots like you will come to realize that of course the constitution applies to whoever we want it to, not just the eveil ole government, which is always evil, as noted in the constiution, which was not, contrary to another liberal myth, created by government itself. And also, between Palin hitting that Paul Revere history question right on the head and having “Constitution” painted right onto her bus, I mean, come on, what more proof do you want? Okay then, here it is: liberal conspiracists have gone around and tried to change history to make it seem like James Madison, father of the constitution, and almost all the rest of the founding fathers, were leading LIBERAL thinkers. Anyone with half an ounce of COMMON SENSE knows that this is impossible and just a wicked liberal lie because freedom is never free and this country is truly great!! God bless this cable guy and our great country and screw you for your god damned intellectual explanations of the constitution.
I love this.
Don’t be a fool and listen to Internet people. Listen to a friend. You have a family to support. While you feel this is morally wrong, it is business. People want a service. Unfortunately, they are going to have to agree to contractual terms to get it. All arguments you have are irrelevant. What is not irrelevant is that you are altering TWCs contract, which as an employee, you can not do. You do have the right to tell them to read it carefully before signing, as that is free speech. If you look in your employment handbook, there is also more than likely a clause about bad mouthing the company in any manner, which you are doing.
Bottom line: Do yourself a favor, drop it, delete this post, try to keep your job. No matter how many people call you a “patriot” and make you feel like you are doing a civil duty- with this, you are not. As always, I admire what you stand for, but this is ignorant. What happens when you get fired? Nobody will care and nothing will change. This will be a story that you tell people when you get hammered. You are way too smart not to see how this will play out. Don’t be stupid, Drahos.
scratch hammered and replace it with Cadillac Drunk. Which we need to do sirs!
I think you are doing the right thing, I work for a an equally evil corporation who uses the same dirty tricks. Unfortunately, this is a civil issue not a criminal issue. The 6th amendment (and most amendments) applies to a persons protection from the government not a contract between two persons, which is what this service agreement is. Anon is right, it is an adhesion contract and completely disputable.
Dirty tricks like… putting it in writing and making you sign the form to validate that you did, indeed, read the writing that they wrote out for you?
Yeah. Sneaky bastards.
Thank you for doing what you do. It takes a lot for someone to go out of their way to help out people they don’t know. This used to be common enough, I’m glad to see there’s still people out there in a younger generation who do it.
Good on you! You deserve all the support we can give.
Hell yeah. Most people are willing to sign anything…myself included. But, like you I read the crap and have refused to sign something or give over my info. Hope you don’t lose your job.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court is not on your side. In California we passed a law saying that these types of provisions in consumer contracts were unconstitutional, the Supreme Court did not agree with us. I think that companies win something like 99% of cases that go into arbitration, which is one of the reasons that California passed a consumer protection law in the first place.
More info here: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/newsrelease/supreme-court-arbitration-ruling-courts-wealthy-and-wall-street
Nowhere does the 6th amendment say anything about civil trials. It specifically mentions ONLY CRIMINAL TRIALS. Disputes with the cable company do NOT constitute criminal trials. Nor does any decision from SCOTUS support your view. Furthermore, the cable company does NOT FORCE its customers to sign — you are free not to sign, so for you to say that the cable company FORCES people is just a flat out lie.
You will lose your job because you, supinely ignorant of the law, decided to erroneously interpret the law to your fancy. Nothing will come of your losing your job.
I hope this teaches you a lesson.
“Disputes with the cable company do NOT constitute criminal trials.” – might want to add the term ‘necessarily’ there hoss. Unless you truly believe a cable company or it’s employees are above criminal acts?
No, if there are criminal matters, then it is likely that the clause does not apply. It is also unlikely that, should the company try, a court will even find that clause actionable.
So instead of being a d**k Rudd, maybe you could step back a second and realize he meant the 7th amendment which allows any civil dispute over 20 dollars to be given the right to a trial by jury. The cable companies, and most companies for that matter, sneak in these little clauses which most people overlook out of ignorance, to make sure that these people, mostly unknowingly, give up this right to a trail by jury. And he never said they are FORCING anyone to sign anywhere, he was just acknowledging the fact that the companies are taking advantage of the common consumer because, like he said, people just do what is necessary to get what they want and often do not read the terms and conditions (think South Park HumanCentiPad). What he was essentially trying to do was remind the consumers of the SEVENTH amendment right before they sign this document which takes it away and gives which ever company something to cover their ass so that their profits aren’t affected. I mean hell who cares about the consumer right? So rudd grow up and take the stick out of your a**, some people actually care about the general well being of the public and are trying to do something altruistic, courageous, and noble; qualities which you likely do not possess.
i hope this teaches you a lesson in humility, d**k
These contract stipulations are non enforceable. It just makes people think they can ‘t sue. It also gives the lawyer something else to argue about and helps when it comes to legal cost awards.
Nothing can take away your right to take someone to court. I work at a business lending company and we have this in our contract. It doesn’t stop us from being taken to court. WE always win but we still get taken to court even though our contract stipulates arbitration.
So you work for Comcast right?
Cause only Comcast would hire a goofy looking fuck like you with all those dumbass piercings. That’s how I know.
You’re wasting your job over this non-issue guy. An agreement with a company that limits trial by jury for issues with said company over disputes of contract has NOTHING TO DO WITH RELINQUISHING YOUR RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN. They are totally separate legal matters and you’re basically going to lose your job over something that has nothing to do with what you are proposing to stand up for. Please take a step back and reconsider what you’re doing because it’s not what you seem to think it is.
This, the arbitration clause in the contract is perfectly constitutional. Please back off and keep your job, your family deserves it.
It would be especially helpful if you could tell us why in fact Drahosky is wasting his job? You say that it is not what he thinks it is but fail to tell us what it actually is.
Good luck. I hope you win this. Anything we can do to help?
You sir, are an American!
I hope you do lose your fucking job, fucking twat
Now what would constitute him being a twat? I wonder if you even have a life…? Hmm probably not. Now go fuck off.
you sound like one of the ups i need to shut or definitely a slut i gotta uppercut. and who uses twat anymore its not 1965 you pretentious prick
I love the word “twat”.
*sigh*
I never care about such stipulations in contracts because if a portion of a contract is found to be in contrast to actual law, it is invalid. I really think it’s funny how many corps think that their ‘policy’ can circumvent actual law.
the constitution does not give you the right to have cable. and it doesn’t protect you from the contract that the mean old cable company requires you to sign if you choose, notice this word, choose. you choose to purchase cable you have to do it by their terms. don’t be a moron use your time more wisely.
you sir, are a champion!
This is not a Constitutional issue. This is a contract issue. The contract is probably unconscionable, but that is not the best argument to lead with.
Ok…one more time…the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are talking about the GOVERNMENT. The 6th Amendment prevents the government from taking away your rights to a jury trial. It does not affect nor address the ability of a private company to determine how a civil (as in Not Criminal) matter will be dealt with.
You are free to disagree with the company’s policy, but trying to hide behind the Constitution is just ignorant.
To further my point, if I were a company owner I could legally do the following: * Prevent you from bringing a firearm onto my property and fire you if you try. * Fire you for saying unkind things about the company even if they are true. * Require you to submit to a search of your belongings while you are on my property and fire you if you refuse.
And so forth. All of those things are covered in the Bill of Rights, which means that the Government can’t do them. And there are a number of laws passed by the legislature at the Federal, State, and local levels that mimic ideas in the Bill of Rights to make them apply to private businesses (such as Equal Employment Opportunity, which would prevent a business owner from firing you for not believing in their religion) but those things have nothing to do with the Constitution.
I hate to see this guy lose his job in this economy, but he should have gone to his boss and talked about what options he had within the company to get the rule changed rather than try to use the Constitution as a shield in a matter where it had no bearing.
End of rant.
I love how people take an act of kindness like this and turn it around on the person and try to shame him for what he believes is right. It’s people like that, that are making this country fail. Good on you for actually sticking up, I don’t think I’d have the balls to do it. If only more people acted this way..
Ryan, shouldn’t you be helping someone move a fridge?
Also the short answer would be that IF it is an inalienable right – then signing a contract can not bind you to it because… it is inalienable. The contract would be void, not withstanding there was a clause within it stating that if any part of this agreement were to be found invalid or unenforceable by the law it does negate the remainder of the document… which there probably was.
TL;DR: You can’t surrender an inalienable right by signing something that says you surrender it.
Yep. Thanks. I teach Entertainment Law (to undergrads in a business department) and the hardest part of teaching the First Amendment is convincing my students that it applies only to the Government. Private institutions can do whatever they wish (I mean within a Constitutional framework).
Also, what’s wrong with an arbitration clause? Arbitration doesn’t give the corporation some crazy leg-up. It pretty much saves both parties a lot of times and expense (legal fees) .. I actually recommend arbitration clauses, just to ease the legal process, god forbid there’s a dispute that reaches that level.
You are part of the problem.
Arbitration is typically bought and paid for by the party with the unconscionable advantage.
This is like going into a legal agreement and trusting the other guy’s lawyer.
Good luck, man. Whatever the case may be, I hope it works out well for you (and us?).
Good luck man. Good deeds will pay off, because they do.
I’ll get jumped on for this, but the 6th Amendment applies to criminal trials, not civil trials. This is what mandatory arbitration agreements refer to. Also, many, not all, but many amendments in the Bill of Rights do not, in that they cannot, apply to private (non-government) entities.
These are two very large impediments you have going against you right out of the gate, man.
y’know… losing a lousy cable installation job over a supposed flag-wrapping act is not exactly mr. smith goes to washington.
but what the hey… this was an interesting read.
another dime-a-dozen guy from rent-a-stiff will be glad to supply john and josie six pack with their 500 channels.
yay you.
You are an amazing and a role model to a majority of humans.
Here’s the short. The cable company is likely more concerned with media attention. It is likely the cable company is training people to just say: “Sign here and here.” With no explanation. The don’t ask… Don’t tell. Reports on cable companies have become a media sport. The cable companies have gotten a bad reputation. (Not that they haven’t earned it) The guy will lose his job as soon as the cable company can figure out how to fire him and minimize collateral damage–which includes not paying him unemployment. A company can have an option to opt in to arbitration. Nothing illegal about that; however, to cloak it as a prerequisite without explanation is a legal issue. Like a contract with a clause that has a font of 1 would be unenforceable and charges of fraud could be litigated. So, the cable company will likely review its process with its lawyers and make the necessary modifications from the contact to the training. Then fire the employee and hire a kid with a master’s degree willing to work for minimum wage because he got to start paying his $50,000 in student loans now or face a 25% penalty plus fees and a unrestricted collection process. Reconsider your position to a full disclosure posture. Although, it may already be too late. Good luck.
I think its reasonable for you to want people to know what they’re signing. Why not just show them that portion of their contract instead of writing on it? You could never be fired for having a customer read his contract before signing it.
Unfortunately, any immoral practices the company engages in are not unconstitutional. Arbitration and alternative dispute resolution have been around in this country and worldwide longer than there have been formal legal institutions. It isn’t a constitutional issue because its between one private party (the customer) and another private party (the business), not between a citizen and the government.
Your best argument is to tell your boss that its right for you to tell your customers what they’re signing. If you are purposely altering the contract though, I think there’s no way you are going to escape the axe. Goodluck.
What you’ll likely run into, or at least the argument I would see a lawyer making, is that the 6th amendment applies to criminal prosecutions and not to civil arbitration. The 6th amendment begins with the clause, “IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, etc”. At least that’s what I would be trying to argue as a corporate lawyer.
I’m not saying this isn’t shady as shit, but the constitution may not apply here unless you can demonstrate criminality.
Is there a lawyer amongst us who can give advice to this man? Are you allowed to get fired for this?
For altering a legal contract between company and consumer, yes
Anyone who has some knowledge of contract law will tell you that shit like that does not fly in court. If someone sues that company will lose. The courts do not favor ridiculous contracts. Especially. The contracts that say you can’t Sue us….you may be right good sir. But things like that are already under scrutiny and control
Arbitration clause is a standard term in services contracts.
The sixth of amendment relates to the rights of someone accused of a crime. It does not relate to civil cases arising out of a dispute with your cable company.
I don’t mean to be the bearer of bad news, but the Sixth Amendment does not apply in the way you think it does.
As has been said above, the Sixth Amendment is very specific in its applications. First, it does not provide an inalienable right to jury trial in ALL cases; only in those involving criminal charges. Second, it does not an inalienable right to jury trial in cases against ANYONE; only in those in which the government is a party. Because the disputes between citizens and the cable company are more likely to be civil in nature, and definitely will not involve the government, the Sixth Amendment is silent as to this issue.
Another very important thing to note. An arbitration proceeding does NOT give the company the decision-making power. Arbitration must proceed through a neutral arbitration firm that is required (by the supreme court) to have all the necessary elements that are normally present in a jury trial. Namely, there must be presentation of evidence, opportunity to call witnesses, adequate opportunity for each side to give its side, and most importantly, a neutral decision-maker.
The Supreme Court has stated in its opinions (forgive me, I can’t find my source) that arbitration can often be a very effective way to take pressure off of the overburdened legal system and reduce overall cost of dispute resolution. Companies obviously favor this because, looking at it from their perspective, it could get very expensive when anyone who thinks they have a valid, actionable claim forces them to go to expensive trials to defend themselves. In truth, the customers also gain great value in this, because the arbitration system is more friendly to people without legal knowledge, and often gets resolved much much faster than a traditional trial.
So that’s the unfortunate legal side of things. Now for the side I’ve been wanting to say:
You are an admirable person for caring about the people you serve and your fellow countrymen. I feel that the company overreacted heavily about this issue, since anyone could surmise that none of the customers you were “releasing” from that clause even knew what you were doing. For all anyone knows, you could have just been writing the number 6 on all of your work orders, so you knew it was one you worked on. I would argue that nothing you did in any way compromised the contract, and as such you should not suffer any consequences for it. You can’t go to jail for selling cocaine if it’s just baking soda in the bag. It’s a legal impossibility.
I hope this enlightens for you how the Sixth Amendment actually protects us, and I hope your job and life can be as unaffected by your well-intentioned decision as possible.
Um… yah.. there is nothing in the bill of rights.. or the constitution that gives any one an Inalienable right to sue some one… and if u are unable to freely give up a right than it wasn’t a “right” in the first place… it’s a law … not worth losing your job over bro.. the statement on that contract is simply to keep stupid people from frivousely acting stupid against the company you work for… aka keeping you in a job
I say you should just keep doing what you’re doing, if you get terminated, file for wrongful termination and collect delicious unemployment.
Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-passionate-defender-of-what-he-imagines-c,2849/
(If you moderate this, you’re hindering mah right to free speech!!! gasp omg police state)
Dude, a private company is a private company. They can set whatever terms they like. If someone doesn’t like it or disagrees, then they have the right to not do business with that company. Those worm orders are agreements between private parties. Any two people are allowed to enter into whatever agreement they want. They are free to do that. If the cable company were government owned you would have a case. But privately owned means you can set whatever business terms you want.
I like the part where you don’t know how to split your writing into f__king paragraphs for readability.
No shit, couldn’t get past the second sentence fragment.
A little history on how arbitration can come back to bite them, google American Arbitration Association and credit card disputes. Buried in credit card agreements is a provision that says, “the parties agree that disputes will be resolved through arbitration through the AAA” Now it worked great for amex, visa, mastercard for years….they won like 96% of their cases….then finally a court saw how unfair it was and AAA got out of the consumer credit card arbitration business…now they can’t arbitrate and the credit card companies cannot sue you in civil court….cause their contract demanded the disputes go to AAA. I’ve used this to successfully defend many consumers in credit card cases….
You should be commended for your intentions… Dave at 2:55 on 6/4/2011 summed it all up the best and he was respectful to you too. Don’t understand the anger and disrespectful behavior by others to someone who simply misunderstood the otherwise complex subject matter of the constitution and bill of rights which MOST of us don’t understand at all.
Please take Dave’s advise and try to keep your job…at least until you find something else that makes you happier. Cable companies are dinosaurs anyway.
Yeah. Those ancient cable companies with their internets and HD, 3D channels. Fucking thing of the past.
1. While you’re correct that the constitution gives people the right to trial by jury, people are (and should be) free to give up any right as part of a contract, so this is not a violation of the constitution.
2. Since you’re not an authorized agent of your company, the modifications you’re making to these contracts may not stick in court.
3. You’re putting your company at huge risk because current out-of-control tort law means that without arbitration your company could be liable for the ridiculously high damages that juries often give out. This kind of thing CAN bankrupt a company very very quickly if something happens. Arbitration may be biased the other way, but simply removing arbitration doesn’t solve the problem.
4. You’re basically lying to your company by changing these without telling them. You’re putting them at huge risk without their knowledge. I find that completely unethical. If I were your boss you’d be fired already and you’d deserve it.
Depending on location: his modifications may be enforceable if the signing party relied or believe agent had these powers, etc.
Supreme court just ruled you can indeed force arbitration. The government can’t censor you but private corporations can. Transferring power to the corporations is an effective end-run around the constitution.
Arbitration is a bad deal for customers – the “judge” is selected (hired) by the company and if you want to keep doing arbitrations you are certainly going to rule in favor of the person writing the check most of the time.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/scotus-rules-att-can-force-arbitration-block-class-action-suits.ars
You’re entirely wrong on your law, by the way. The Sixth Amendment applies only to criminal prosecutions, not civil litigation (like claims for damages against cable companies). Many of the rights in the Sixth don’t apply to civil lawsuits, like the right to a lawyer, or the right to a “speedy” trial, or the right to a jury, or the right to confront witnesses.
You’re a tool. I hope you do get fired for being a moron.
As you said, it’s CABLE. It’s not like the people you are “protecting” are giving up a kidney.
Let me be accountable. I’m a big boy. I don’t need a white knight.
Get over yourself and find a way to deflate your freaking ego, please.
Wow, way to throw away your job for nothing. The Bill of Rights protects the individual from the government, those employed by the media or high-security companies all have contracts that restricts their freedom of speech, for example.
This reminds me of Carrie Prejean, the bimbo who was de-crowned in a ms america pageant for her speech against gays. She made a huge deal about how her freedom of speech was being restricted, but private employment contracts are not covered by freedom of speech.
The same thing applies to consumers. You could have pointed out this clause explicitly to the customers if you thought (rightfully) that they would only skim the document. They could then make a judgement to whether or not this is a big deal. Further, instead of altering contracts and subverting the company you work for, you should have brought it up to a legal counsel or ethical contact at your workplace, and they would explain that such a clause is actually not that uncommon.
It seems that people are missing the point that you stood up for a principal you believed in.
Too often we reflexively concede because standing up is difficult. Sometimes it *has to* be worth the fight, as you’ve discovered. Good on you.
If everyone was as compassionate and caring of others as the cableman,our world maybe a little more tolerable! Good for you for standing up for,not only what you believe but the people whom you dont even know.This world needs so many more of you!! How can a person condem another for standing up for the rights of us all,including the strangers that was stood up for!!! Cable is not a right,but the treatment that is given to those for choosing it needs to be fought for! I thank you for being the man that you are,and the rest of us need to say thank you as well!!
Poor guy, i dont want to see him losing his job in this situation, but instead of using constitution as a shield you can directly approach the company MD and discuss your situation and the matter frankly.
Cool you still have your job. But it it sounds like they’re giving a threat. That’s wrong. From one Dragos to another keep up the free speech.
Great blog over here! Ill come back later to check if you have posted new articles.
In awe of that anewsr! Really cool!