ADR: An Urgent Need for More Competition and Greater Diversity, Law.com

In an op-ed published by Law.com, New Era Chairman and Co-Founder Collin Williams explains the deficiencies in alternative dispute resolution that present implications not only for fairness and legitimacy but also for the quality and accessibility of justice.

“What are the benefits of alternative dispute resolution (ADR)?” Collin asks in his column. “Ostensibly, flexibility, efficiency, equitable solutions, speed, and cost all favor the use of ADR. Still, the process faces a significant challenge: A lack of diversity among its practitioners, decision-makers and the number of available platforms. These deficiencies present implications not only for fairness and legitimacy but also for the quality and accessibility of justice. Additionally, a lack of diversity in available platforms has recently led to alarming antitrust challenges.”

Collin points to publicly available statistics from the two largest ADR providers in the U.S., which cite a significant lack of diversity.

“With respect to competition, these two providers handle 99% of the consumer arbitrations in this country,” Collin explains. “This high market share has led to recent antitrust challenges. One of these ADR providers is being sued for allegedly monopolizing the consumer arbitration space through ‘cut-rate pricing on arbitrations that do not adequately reflect the actual cost of neutral proceedings, rules that encourage corporations to provide only one choice in arbitral forums by disallowing discovery into corporations’ tactics, and shockingly abysmal outcomes for consumers.’ These challenges underscore the need for greater competition in the ADR space.”

Subscribers to Law.com can read Collin’s article here.