Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

Public trust in the fairness of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”), is critical to its continued use, acceptance, and effectiveness. Perceptions that ADR is “rigged” or that it is unfair, or that its procedures have been intentionally constructed for the purpose of influencing the disposition of ADR disputes, undermines the acceptance of ADR for dispute resolution, and may lead to changes in laws enabling businesses and individuals to elect mandatory ADR for streamlined full and final dispute resolution. In recent years mandatory arbitration provisions have been incorporated in contracts where the ADR procedures are not fair and balanced and where they do not protect the due process rights of the involved parties. While we might expect courts and arbitration panels to safeguard ADR fairness and ADR due process rights, reality may actually be quite different.