Googlers for Ending Forced Arbitration share phone bank feedback, fellow organizers … and the flaw in Google’s refusal to end forced arbitration for Suppliers
NEW YORK, NY (May 3, 2019) — This week, a series of nationwide phone banks organized by Googlers for Ending Forced Arbitration and the Pipeline Parity Project drove calls to Congress by sharing their personal motivations:
Constituents across the country used our phone bank materials and the new 5 Calls page to speak with Senators and Representatives about the need to pass the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act (FAIR Act). Callers shared some of their experiences:
NY — Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-D) — My first time calling Congress, and it was empowering, and a bit intimidating. I called because this is an important issue, and I have a friend that went through sexual harassment and gender discrimination.
TX — Senator John Cornyn (TX-R) — Amazing, I actually got to talk to someone and she was so nice! I was nervous to call a Republican office because it seems this is falling along party lines, but she really did listen.
NY — House Rep. Elise Stefanik (NY-R-21) — Since the Congresswoman is not a member of Judiciary committee, she’s pending the markup. But since she co-sponsored the Bustos bill about ending arbitration for sexual harassment this seems like a natural extension.
CO — Senator Michael Bennet (CO-D) — Staffer didn’t know there was a bill in the Senate (thought it was in the House only). Said she would pass the support along.
NY — House Rep. Joseph D. Morelle (NY-D-25) — He, the staffer, was kind. We discussed how forced arbitration aggravated my sexual assault. I said that I know that Representative Morelle has been supportive of sexual assault survivors and I truly appreciated and that this is another way to support us. He took my name and zip code. Good conversation. He is invested in the situation, but his stance is not confirmed.
MT — Senator Jon Tester (MT-D) — Even though he’s not a sponsor, staffer says he intends to support it.
CA — House Rep. Mike Thompson (CA-D-5) — Talked to a woman named Wendy, she said the bill hadn’t come in front of her yet. She was surprised to see 189 co-sponsors already. She said she’d take a look!
GA — Senator Johnny Isakson (GA-R) — The staffer said that he wanted to personally thank me for bringing his attention to the issue because he’d never heard of it himself. He said he’d look into it and bring it to the Senator’s attention.
NY — House Rep. Chris Collins (NY-R-27) — Heard me out on why this is not a partisan issue and was actually really nice.
In between hitting the phones, we also supported our colleagues currently facing retaliation for their activism at Google by attending sit-ins throughout the company. In the spirit of ‘strength in numbers’, nine of the Googlers for Ending Arbitration organizers share their names and faces today. We stand in solidarity with anyone actively working to bring equity to the workplace.
The other revelation came from Google’s statement about why it refuses to take a stand against Suppliers that force arbitration on their own employees. As reported in The Mercury News, “The company said Wednesday it would not tell other companies, including suppliers of workers, how to deal with employee disputes. Some of its suppliers employ unionized workers whose union membership requires arbitration for certain workplace issues, Google said.”
This is misdirection.
Professor Alex Colvin, currently serving as Interim Dean at Cornell ILR, explains, “Labor arbitration in the unionized context is very different from mandatory arbitration. A company could prohibit mandatory arbitration for nonunion employees of suppliers without that having anything to do with the labor arbitration provisions of union contracts. I would argue it is a major misstatement to call labor arbitration “mandatory arbitration” since these provisions are negotiated by the union representing the workers, whereas the essence of mandatory arbitration is that there is no effective negotiation over the arbitration provision.” Read Professor Colvin’s full study with the Economic Policy Institute here.
Professor Katherine Stone of UCLA Law School further elaborates, “Forced arbitration for nonunion workers forces them to waive their right to court to enforce their labor rights and instead use a procedure designed by their employer. Because the results of arbitration are unpredictable, the process is often unfair, the outcomes are invisible, and the procedure can be expensive for individual workers, most workers simply walk away, even if they have experienced serious workplace violations such as sexual assault. Arbitration under collective bargaining is totally different. There, arbitration deals with allegations of contract violations, where the terms of the contract have been negotiated. It does not determine allegations of statutory violations. Moreover, in arbitration under a union contract, the worker is represented by the union and does not have to hire a lawyer. The process is fair and the results are known to all concerned. It is the opposite of forced arbitration.” Watch the panel we hosted with Professor Stone, Professor Colvin and more here:
So let us clarify what we’re still seeking from Alphabet:
a) End forced arbitration for all its Bets, not just Google (ex: Verily, Waymo etc)
b) Refuse to work with any Supplier that forces arbitration on non-unionized employees
We’ve said it before, but we’ll say it again — we’re not going anywhere until all workers have access to their rights and the courts to protect those rights. We will keep fighting until the FAIR Act becomes law.
