Passenger Trains > Sen. Blumenthal leads effort to end Amtrak’s shield from lawsui

...And Amtrak's Anderson responds with his typical defiant bluster...

Blumenthal leads effort to end Amtrak’s shield from lawsuits
CTMirror.org
by Ana Radelat
December 3, 2019


Washington — Sen. Richard Blumenthal is leading a congressional pushback against Amtrak’s new ticketing policy, which prevents passengers from suing the railroad company.

Early this year, Amtrak changed the boilerplate language on its tickets to prevent passengers injured in Amtrak accidents or those with any other grievance from suing the company in court. Instead, those passengers will be forced into binding arbitration.

Initially, few noticed the change, which would also prevent class-action lawsuits against Amtrak.

But now the revised boilerplate language has gotten the attention of Congress.

Last week, Blumenthal led a group of 13 Senate Democrats, including presidential contenders Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Cory Booker, D-N.J., Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., in a letter to Amtrak demanding it “immediately eliminate this anti-consumer arbitration and class action policy.”

The senators said that claims subject to forced arbitration “are relegated to private forums where powerful defendants, like Amtrak, can stack the deck against claimants and cover up wrongdoing.”

Richard Blumenthal is leading an effort in the Senate to block Amtrak’s binding arbitration policy.

“Faced with these daunting odds, many potential claimants decline to file claims in the first place,” the senators wrote.

The lawmakers also said the closed-door nature of forced arbitration “lacks transparency” and prevents the public from learning about the causes of accidents that result in major injuries and death.

Amtrak President Richard Anderson wrote the senators a swift and defiant response saying that the rail company will continue its new policy.

Anderson said Amtrak did not develop its arbitration program in order to disadvantage passengers or escape liability or accountability for accidents, but to “expedite resolution of claims and to reduce unnecessary litigation costs.”

“Arbitration provides a resolution in less time – generally well within a year of filing – by avoiding unnecessary discovery and other time-consuming proceedings, and the often years-long wait for a trial date on overcrowded court dockets,” Anderson wrote. “Agreements to arbitrate are desirable precisely because they trade the procedures of the federal courts for the simplicity, informality, and expedition of arbitration.”

Anderson also provided the senators with an accounting of claims against Amtrak from 2015 through this year that shows a vast majority of claims against his company are resolved outside of litigation and those that are taken to court have cost the company about $11 million in legal fees.

    “They say it costs less, it’s quicker, but the rights of plaintiffs are vastly undercut. Amtrak should not be able to deny them a day in court.”

“We believe arbitrating disputed passenger claims under our policy will reduce those costs significantly; that is money that can then be spent in safety programs and other passenger service and care programs,” Anderson wrote.

Blumenthal said Anderson’s is the “typical response” to criticisms about forced arbitration.

“They say it costs less, it’s quicker, but the rights of plaintiffs are vastly undercut,” the senator said. “Amtrak should not be able to deny them a day in court.”

Blumenthal also said he and other Democrats who have asked Anderson to eliminate the new contract language on passenger tickets are not intent on banning arbitration.

“We’re just saying (arbitration) has to be mutually agreed to,” he said.

Federal regulations prohibit airlines from imposing a contract that precludes passengers from suing them in “any court of competent jurisdiction.”

But those regulations don’t apply to railroads.

Amtrak runs about 60 trains in Connecticut and sold nearly 1.8 million tickets in the state alone last year.

It changed its contract with passengers after victims of a 2015 derailment in Philadelphia that killed eight people and injured hundreds more won a $265 million court settlement against the company.

Blumenthal has introduced a bill, the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal (FAIR) Act, that would invalidate all agreements that requires the forced arbitration of an employment, consumer, or civil rights claim against a corporation.

Blumenthal’s bill has 38 Senate co-sponsors, but they are all Democrats and the legislation has yet to move in the GOP-controlled Senate.

However, Amtrak’s arbitration clause has also caused a stir in the U.S. House.

At a wide ranging hearing on Amtrak last month in the House Transportation Committee, top Democrats said they would consider legislation banning forced arbitration clauses for railroads that is similar to the existing ban on forced arbitration clauses for airlines.

Besides approving legislation banning forced arbitration, Congress can pressure Amtrak in other ways.

Each year, lawmakers approve enough federal subsidies for Amtrak to keep the railroad operating. Some of the biggest supporters of Amtrak’s funding are also the Democrats seeking an end to the forced arbitration clause.

Blumenthal said there’s another way to pressure Amtrak.

“And that’s bringing the arbitration clause to its customers' attention,” he said.

https://ctmirror.org/2019/12/03/blumenthal-leads-effort-to-end-amtraks-shield-from-lawsuits/
 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/19 22:16 by GenePoon.

Blumenthal is a bloomin' idiot.  When he's not fantasizing about being a Vietnam war vet, he's almost getting wacked by trains at safety meetings.  

But this is one issue I agree with him on.  

https://youtu.be/u9LTOnQaYfc

Perhaps we can do the same for Banks too.

Never mind, there are black helicopters flying over my house now.

Brian

Neither party is on the side of the angels here. Amtrak naturally wants to pay out smaller awards, and the trial lawyers (who are by sheer coincidence a sizable donor class to Democrats) naturally want to preserve the status quo that obtained before the policy change.

Since Anderson claims to be so data-driven in all his decisions--yes, bear with me--show us the data. He claims the company spent $11 million defending lawsuits.

A lot of Blumenthal's arguments fall flat. Discovery process prior to trial and the "public's right to know" is largely a red herring. Many settlements come with non-disclosure agreements, and in the case of major incidents Amtrak accepts liability anyway, either because it was clearly at fault, or its indemnity agreements with the host railroads require it to do so. And of course the NTSB thoroughly investigates major crashes.

Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA

I think these Senators are more pissed at the stealth way in which Anderson went about it and his attitude is not helping. 

Brian, It's useless to try to evade them as your smartphone has secretly imbedded an electronic signature in your brain which lets them pin point your location 24/,7 365. Better just surrender. 

   Ross Rowland 

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think these Senators are more pissed at the
> stealth way in which Anderson went about it and
> his attitude is not helping. 

Amtrak is not a federal agency subject to the rulemaking process, so it can change its Terms and Conditions at will, as long as they are not contrary to law. But I see your point that it is unseemly for a taxpayer-supported outfit to behave in such an underhanded manner.

Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA

This may be good since Andersen is pushing back maybe he will piss off enough in Congress to get the BOOT....

bluesboyst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This may be good since Andersen is pushing back
> maybe he will piss off enough in Congress to get
> the BOOT....

Does congress hire and fire the Amtrak president or is that a white house function?

This is my opinion:

The overwhelming majority of junk civil lawsuits that occur in today's climate of money hungry lawyers and claimants looking to make "easy" money has created the necessity for contractual arbitration agreements. 

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is my opinion:
>
> The overwhelming majority of junk civil lawsuits
> that occur in today's climate of money hungry
> lawyers and claimants looking to make "easy" money
> has created the necessity for contractual
> arbitration agreements. 

I agree with this.

Cole42 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jst3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This is my opinion:
> >
> > The overwhelming majority of junk civil
> lawsuits
> > that occur in today's climate of money hungry
> > lawyers and claimants looking to make "easy"
> money
> > has created the necessity for contractual
> > arbitration agreements. 
>
> I agree with this.

The TV is filled with ads for law firms who will get you big money for your auto and slip / fall injuries.  In Florida, the ads list amounts won by lawyers for their clients. With small print saying these results are not typical, etc.

But many arbitration cases are stacked against the injured person, with "neutral" arbitrators selected by the companies who did the damage in the first place.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cole42 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > jst3751 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > This is my opinion:
> > >
> > > The overwhelming majority of junk civil
> > lawsuits
> > > that occur in today's climate of money hungry
> > > lawyers and claimants looking to make "easy"
> > money
> > > has created the necessity for contractual
> > > arbitration agreements. 
> >
> > I agree with this.
>
> The TV is filled with ads for law firms who will
> get you big money for your auto and slip / fall
> injuries.  In Florida, the ads list amounts won
> by lawyers for their clients. With small print
> saying these results are not typical, etc.
>
> But many arbitration cases are stacked against the
> injured person, with "neutral" arbitrators
> selected by the companies who did the damage in
> the first place.

The problem is with our legal system the way it is, there is no fair middle ground. Because of rampant greed, from the personal level to the legal level to the corporate level to the government level, a fair common sense outcome is rare. Sad!

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bluesboyst Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This may be good since Andersen is pushing back
> > maybe he will piss off enough in Congress to
> get
> > the BOOT....
>
> Does congress hire and fire the Amtrak president
> or is that a white house function?

I think the executive branch selects the Amtrak Pres and board. 
It should be noted that Trump is no fan of Amtrak. Anderson is Trumps guy. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/19 10:53 by ATSF3751.

ATSF3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the executive branch selects the Amtrak
> Pres and board. 
> It should be noted that Trump is no fan of Amtrak.
> Anderson is Trumps guy. 

The executive branch nominates board members subject to Senate confirmation. The Board appoints the president/CEO.

prr60 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ATSF3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I think the executive branch selects the Amtrak
> > Pres and board. 
> > It should be noted that Trump is no fan of
> Amtrak.
> > Anderson is Trumps guy. 
>
> The executive branch nominates board members
> subject to Senate confirmation. The Board appoints
> the president/CEO.

Thank you for the clearification

prr60 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ATSF3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I think the executive branch selects the Amtrak
> > Pres and board. 
> > It should be noted that Trump is no fan of
> Amtrak.
> > Anderson is Trumps guy. 
>
> The executive branch nominates board members
> subject to Senate confirmation. The Board appoints
> the president/CEO.

I believe that in addition to the President nominated/Senate confirmed members of the Board, there are two ex-officio members of the Board. One is the SecDOT and the other is the CEO (if I am not mistaken).

prr60 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ATSF3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I think the executive branch selects the Amtrak
> > Pres and board. 
> > It should be noted that Trump is no fan of
> Amtrak.
> > Anderson is Trumps guy. 
>
> The executive branch nominates board members
> subject to Senate confirmation. The Board appoints
> the president/CEO.

The story I heard is that Anderson was a campaign contributor to Hillary and could have been her DOT Secretary.
Gardner was a Hill staffer for Democrats.
Coscia is a Democrat.

Seems that Blumenthal and 11 other Democratic Senators, besides Manchin. are starting to get it that at least one of their own is out of control.

Mr Coscia may be a Democrat, but wasn't he Chris Christie's choice for chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey?  His day job was / is a well connected law firm partner.

Sounds like he can work both sides of the street, as necessary.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr Coscia may be a Democrat, but wasn't he Chris
> Christie's choice for chairman of the Port
> Authority of New York and New Jersey?  His day
> job was / is a well connected law firm partner.
>
> Sounds like he can work both sides of the street,
> as necessary.

In the middle the difference between a Democrat and a Republican is that of Twiddle Dum and Twiddle Dee. Afterall Boardman was a Republican.