Ex-Twitter Employee Sues to Compel Company to Arbitration

Francisco to compel Twitter to arbitration. Ma and about 2,000 other former Twitter employees “signed nearly identical arbitration agreements that state that they are applicable to any disputes arising from or related to their employment with Twitter or separation of their employment,” said the petition. Most of those agreements say the parties would bring any claims in arbitration before Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, it said. An employee who brings an arbitration case to JAMS must pay an initial filing fee, but the employer must pay all other arbitration fees, including fees for the arbitrator, it said. After Ma filed his arbitration demand Jan. 11, an arbitrator was appointed to his case and a final hearing scheduled for December, said his petition. But on June 2, after about 2,000 individual arbitrations had been filed against Twitter, the company “reversed course,” it said. Despite knowing JAMS rules require employers to pay the full arbitrator fees in employment cases, Twitter wrote JAMS, “requesting that all arbitration fees be split equally among the parties,” except in California and a few other states, including Nevada and Oregon, it said. When JAMS denied the request, Twitter responded by refusing to proceed with arbitrations in most states outside California, it said. JAMS answered by declining to arbitrate any disputes in which Twitter refused to pay, and then notified claimants their scheduled conferences and hearings would be canceled, it said.