9/24/18 – Wezzle Works



|

2018-09-24-spacetrawler2

|

Wezzle’s words would probably be what I was thinking at that moment. 🙂

10 Comments

      1. Draci

        Hey hey! Just a reminder that this comic still calls them the Arbitrator, while the earlier ones call them the Nonpartisan.

        I figured since the two weeks have passed, you might’ve liked a reminder. ;P

        PS
        First time reading through your stories, and they’re marvelous! Thank you for making all this

  1. Peter Rogan

    I’m really interested in what word replaces ‘Arbitrator.’ Given his role, no other word seems quite as apropos. After all, an arbitrator is one brought in to settle a conflict, with presumably no stake in one over the other. Independence is built-in. A different word would inject some other non-neutral sense of what the Abby does. And be revealing to boot.

    1. reynard61

      “(…A)n arbitrator is one brought in to settle a conflict, with presumably no stake in one over the other. Independence is built-in.”

      Have you ever tried to go through “arbitration” when a large corporation has ripped you off? There is *NOTHING* “independent” about them. Unless you have utterly ironclad evidence to back up your claim — and sometimes not even then(!) — the so-called “arbitrator” will usually side with the corporation. (Protip: read any contract carefully and if it gives you the option to go to court, *use it!*)

      https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/business/dealbook/arbitration-everywhere-stacking-the-deck-of-justice.html

      https://populardemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Forced-Arbitration_web%20%283%29_0.pdf

      https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2013/09/06/forced-arbitration-is-a-corporate-get-out-of-jail-free-card

      1. Peter Rogan

        The corporate definition of ‘arbitration’ is ‘we have a judge and a court and you will stand trial in it for daring to complain.’ It’s not the real definition of the word and the abuse of it is going to result in a Fourth Amendment challenge sooner or later — all that needs to happen is for some impugned company to bring in the US Marshals and there’s your involvement of Federal authorities to enforce a private decision.

        The real obstacle, however, is a Federal government willing to overturn the Posse Comitatus Act of 1877 that prohibits the use of Federal troops in local labor disputes. The DoD’s Northern Command webpage — the one for the armed forces assigned to keep order on the continent in case of civil unrest and/or widespread terrorism used to have a footnote addressing the question of directly violating Posse Comitatus. It’s not there any more. So much for law. Here, take a look yourself.

        http://www.northcom.mil/About-USNORTHCOM/

        More and more ‘arbitration’ is falling to ‘arbitrary’ — not quite capricious, but intentionally misleading with the intent to do you harm. And it runs right through the US military, should it come to that. You’re in worse shape than you know. So are we all.

Leave a Reply to Dean L. Surkin Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *