In response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in AT&T, Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion, Senator Al Franken announced his plan to reintroduce the Arbitration Fairness Act . The Act would ban mandatory arbitration clauses in employment, consumer, and civil rights cases. “This ruling is another example of the Supreme Court favoring corporations over consumers,” said Sen. Franken. “The Arbitration Fairness Act would help rectify the Court’s most recent wrong by restoring consumer rights. Consumers play an important role in holding corporations accountable, and this legislation will ensure that consumers in Minnesota and nationwide can continue to play this crucial role.” Find the press release here. Related Posts: GUEST-POST Part II | AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion and the Bright Side of the Force (May2, 2011) GUEST-POST Part I | AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion and the Bright Side of the Force (May 2, 2011) Law Review Article | Regulating Mandatory Arbitration (Apr. 15, 2011) GUEST-POST Part II | Employment Arbitration: Short-Term Value but Long-Term Harm (Jan. 7, 2010) GUEST-POST Part I | Employment Arbitration: Short-Term Value but Long-Term Harm (Jan. 6, 2010) 2009 Developments: Consumer and Employment Arbitration (Dec. 23, 2009) Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009 – H.R. 1020 Gaining Momentum? (Nov. 11, 2009) WSJ: “Turmoil in Arbitration Empire Upends Credit-Card Disputes” (Oct. 19, 2009) Defense Contractor Mandatory Arbitration Passes Senate [with video] (Oct. 13, 2009) Jones v. Halliburton: Fifth Circuit Rules on Arbitration of Tort Claims by an Employee (Sept. 18, 2009) GUEST-POST |Rectifying a Critical Flaw in the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009 (April 27, 2009) Technorati Tags: law, ADR, arbitration

by Holly Hayes A Canadian study, “Assessing Residents’ Communication Skills: Disclosure of an Adverse Event to a Standardized Patient” from the March Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Canada (JOGC) reported results of a study to assess “residents’ communication skills involving the disclosure of a poor outcome to a standardized patient using a standardized patient encounter, and to compare their performance before and after formal teaching on disclosure”. The study found: It is reassuring that four items were performed very well prior to formal teaching on the subject (“professionalism,” “avoiding barriers,” “speaking at a comfortable rate,” and “using appropriate body language”), the implication being that some of these skills are taught or learned in other ways, either through an innate “bedside manner” or through role-modelling or transfer from other communication skills. We can postulate that the items that were most improved after the educational intervention (“allow time to express feelings,” “introduce the topic,” and “introduce oneself ”) are items that can be taught but are not being taught elsewhere, and are behaviours that are not being modeled. However, an alternative interpretation is that the residents did not demonstrate these skills in an examination setting until they learned that these items were important. The study concluded: “Residents’ performance in disclosure of adverse events improves after formal teaching.” This conclusion is in keeping with a study by the Lucian Leape Institute at the National Patient Safety Foundation; Unmet Needs: Teaching Physicians to Provide Safe Patient Care, 2010. The white paper concluded that “[U.S.] medical schools are not doing an adequate job of facilitating student understanding of basic knowledge and the development of skills required for the provision of safe patient care.” The report urged medical schools to: “teach patient safety as a basic science and ensure that students develop interpersonal and communication skills through experiences working in teams with nursing, pharmacy, and other professional students.” For more on this topic read here and here. Contact us to learn more about our training in healthy conflict engagement where residents and other staff can learn communication skills to discuss adverse events with patients and techniques to improve collaboration in the workplace. Technorati Tags: Healthcare Holly Hayes is a mediator at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert where she focuses on mediation of health care disputes. Holly holds a B.A. from Southern Methodist University and a Masters in Health Administration from Duke University. She can be reached at holly@karlbayer.com.

On April 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion. The question presented was whether the FAA prohibits states from conditioning the enforceability of certain arbitration agreements on the availability of class-wide arbitration procedures. We thought you would like to read some interesting commentary about the opinion: AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion: FAA preempts rule that makes class action waivers in arbitration agreements unenforceable, DLA Piper (May 2) GUEST-POST PART I | AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion and the Bright Side of the Force, Disputing (May 2) GUEST-POST PART II | AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion and the Bright Side of the Force, Disputing (May 2) Opinion analysis: What counts as arbitration, and who decides? SCOTUSblog (April 30) Arbitration Decision Suggests SCOTUS Majority Are Pro-Business More Than Jurisprudential Conservatives, Dorf on Law (April 29) AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion: Arbitration, Legal Fees and Class Actions, ADR Law (April 29) Seeking a Day in Court: When Litigants Reject Tenders of Damages, Business Conflict Blog (April 28) After AT&T Ruling, Should We Say Goodbye to Consumer Class Actions? The Wall Street Journal (April 27) Supreme Court Allows Contracts That Prohibit Class-Action Arbitration, The New York Times (April 27) Supreme Court Allows Companies to Opt Out of Class Actions, ADR Prof Blog (April 27) Continuing the Discussion of the AT&T v. Concepcion Decision: Implications for the future, ADR Prof Blog (April 27) Impact of Concepcion on Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards, ADR Prof Blog (April 27) Sternlight on AT&T v. Concepcion, ADR Prof Blog (April 27) Supremes Uphold Arbitral Class-Action Waivers, Workplace Prof Blog (April 27) Federal Arbitration Act preempts state law that made class action waiver unconscionable, LawMemo (April 27)   Technorati Tags: law, ADR, arbitration

On May 2, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to yet another consumer arbitration case, CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood, No. 10-948. In Greenwood, the Ninth Circuit decided whether the word “sue,” as used in the Credit Repair Organization Act (“CROA”) means “arbitrate.” The court concluded that Congress meant what it said in using the term “sue,” and that it did not mean “arbitrate.” The Supreme Court is expected to resolve a spit between the Ninth Circuit and Third and Eleventh Circuits. Briefs and Documents (from SCOTUSblog): Opinion below (9th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioners’ reply Amicus brief of DRI – the Voice of the Defense Bar Amicus brief of Consumer Data Industry Association Hat tip to Mark Kantor. Technorati Tags: law, ADR, arbitration