S. 647 · 115th Congress
Mandatory Arbitration Transparency Act of 2017
Key: what the circles and colors mean
Each circle is a bill. The ring fills as it moves through Congress:
Under the number: the Yea · Nay count of its final (or latest) recorded vote. On a member's page, the small badge is how that member voted: Y Yea / Aye, N Nay / No, P Present, – Not voting.
Gold and violet are only for Yea and Nay; they never mean a party. A member's party is the letter on their photo.
Never voted on. It didn't reach a floor vote before the 115th Congress ended, so it expired. A bill has to be introduced again to be considered in a new Congress.
D
BlumenthalSponsor6 cosponsors · 6 D
6 signed on when it was introduced; the rest joined later. Cosponsors who withdrew aren't shown.
This bill prohibits predispute arbitration agreements from containing a confidentiality clause regarding an employment, consumer, or civil rights dispute that could be interpreted to prohibit a party from: (1) making a communication in a manner such that the prohibition would violate a whistle-blower statute; or (2) reporting or making a communication about…
What it does: CRS summary · Introduced in Senate · Mar 15, 2017
Mandatory Arbitration Transparency Act of 2017
This bill prohibits predispute arbitration agreements from containing a confidentiality clause regarding an employment, consumer, or civil rights dispute that could be interpreted to prohibit a party from: (1) making a communication in a manner such that the prohibition would violate a whistle-blower statute; or (2) reporting or making a communication about tortious conduct, unlawful conduct, or issues of public policy or public concern. But the prohibition shall not apply if a party can demonstrate a confidentiality interest that significantly outweighs the private and public interest in disclosure.
The validity or enforceability of such an agreement to arbitrate shall be determined by a court, under federal law, rather than by an arbitrator, irrespective of whether the party resisting arbitration challenges the arbitration agreement specifically or in conjunction with other terms of the contract containing such agreement.
The bill does not apply to contracts between an employer and a labor organization or between labor organizations, except that no such arbitration provision shall waive the right of an employee to seek judicial enforcement of a right arising under the U.S. Constitution, a state constitution, a federal or state statute, or related public policy.
The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce against violations by persons offering such agreements, which shall be treated as unfair or deceptive acts or practices under Federal Trade Commission Act. The bill also allows private rights of action by any persons aggrieved by a violation.
Written by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. All summary versions on Congress.gov
About this bill and sources
Official title: Mandatory Arbitration Transparency Act of 2017
Latest action (Mar 15, 2017): Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Policy area: Law · Origin: Senate · Introduced: Mar 15, 2017
Official page on Congress.gov · Bill text (GovInfo) · Status record (XML)
No recorded floor vote found.