Post

Well this is eleventy-million kinds of Fucked Up. @latimes.com (who once contracted with me as a freelance reviewer and whom I struggled to get paid by) asserts that *merely reading its website* constitutes a permanent waiver of your right to sue it under *any circumstances*.

I may have asked this question a few weeks ago after noticing a suspicious increase in emails all coincidentally about changes in user agreements. Every single company wrote about going to arbitration and waiving the right to sue in class action. bsky.app/profile/vict...

My employer just made me sign an arbitration agreement. I've started updating my resume and expect to find a new job next year. I don't need to work for a company that thinks it is likely to violate my rights and so makes me waive some rights to protect them from the expected future violations.

Must be nice for that to be an option. I don't recall a single employer I've worked for NOT having that as part of the onboarding document package.

Civil rights law violation and family medical leave law violations all will now go to arbitration, supposedly. I've never seen these terms because no company I've ever worked at has even sort of pushed boundaries on the easy stuff like that.

That's unenforceable, period.

I think they're betting on a DoL and DoJ that hate workers and will help them violate the plain language of the law.

Any language in waiving the right to open class action lawsuits against them? That’s what specifically put my spidey senses on fire last month 🔥