Assembly Bill 802 Makes Arbitration Less Confidential
Tuesday, October 14, 2014 at 2:36PM
Admin in Business Law, California Law, Employment Defense, General Business, Hannah Sweiss, Litigation, dispute resolution

Business LitigationBusiness and Employment Litigation Attorney

by Hannah Sweiss



On September 30, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 802 (AB 802) into law, amending Section 1281.96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, relating to consumer arbitration.

Effective January 1, 2015, AB 802 requires large-scale arbitration providers such as JAMS and AAA to collect and publish certain details about consumer arbitration proceedings that were previously confidential. Arbitration providers must publish the required information in a consumer-friendly format, accessible from a conspicuous link on the arbitration providers’ website. 

What information will arbitration providers have to publish under AB 802? 

Prior to AB 802, one of the significant benefits to arbitration was the confidentiality and privacy of arbitration proceedings. The new disclosure requirements chip away at these protections and potentially expose businesses to more frivolous claims.

Now consumers (more likely consumer attorneys) can easily assess which entities/employers are arbitrating more often than others and the results of those arbitrations. The new law practically offers up a guidebook for serial complainants to bring claims against businesses who have a public history (in a private forum) of paying out awards to claimants.

This disclosure requirement may also add a layer of time and cost to the arbitration process. Now arbitration providers have to spend time and money collecting, assembling and disseminating information that may not have otherwise been readily available. This could potentially translate into higher arbitration fees and more time spent involved in the overall arbitration process.

Despite the new disclosure requirements under AB 802, arbitration still has benefits for certain employers. Employers can potentially limit employee class actions for wage-and-hour, employment discrimination, and other labor and employment claims. Arbitration may offer a more streamlined process to resolve employment claims. And there is limited discovery, which may help reduce time spent on discovery.             

Although there are benefits, arbitration has disadvantages, particularly for employers. Arbitration is often more costly. Arbitration fees are usually more expensive than court filing fees and employers are required to pay the arbitrator’s fees. The outcome in arbitration may also be riskier than state or federal court litigation because there are fewer checks on the arbitrator’s discretion and no meaningful appellate procedure.

Therefore, arbitration may not always be the best option for employers. It is important for employers to discuss with legal counsel before requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements.

Hannah Sweiss is a Business & Employment Litigation Attorney. Contact her via email:, or by phone: 818.907.3260 for more information.

This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only, to provide general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Article originally appeared on Los Angeles Attorneys (
See website for complete article licensing information.