Health insurance in the US is currently in a transitional stage. Historically, employers may provide their employees with health insurance. There is currently no federal law requiring them to do so, but some states do.
Where an employer provides health insurance as a benefit he does this by paying part of his employees’ insurance premiums. Some employers pay the full premiums, others pay a part, and yet others don’t actually pay anything but have made an arrangement with an insurance carrier to provide discounts for his employees. The larger the employer, the higher the discount.
A caveat for employees is that an insurer may re-negotiate the terms of the contract with the employer. If this happens the employee, in his capacity as the insured, finds herself with new insurance terms or premiums, without being able to influence the decision. Another issue is that the employer may be able to negotiate a better deal with a different insurance carrier. In that case the employee, as the insured, changes insurance company altogether. In practice that often means that she must also change her doctor and other medical service providers.
Technology does not stand still. Another major development for the porn industry was the internet. It is obvious that distributing porn via the internet, so that men can access it in the privacy of their homes, will create a large new market among those who would hesitate to visit sleazy sex shops.
Indeed, although it is not often discussed, the truth is that after the internet was made available for commercial use in the early 1990s, the porn industry were pioneers in developing business models which function successfully with this medium. Again, the technical innovation has created problems for the law.
The problems as they existed when the internet was first commercialized were surveyed in detail by Colin Manchester. Manchester concluded that, without new legislation, legal control is likely to become increasingly ineffective as computer pornography becomes more prevalent and replaces videos as the dominant medium for the dissemination of obscene material.
Arbitration is the submission of a dispute to a judge or judges, in principle chosen by the parties, who agree to accept and respect the judgment. The judges are called ‘arbitrators’ and their judgment an ‘award’. Although some arbitration are conducted by a single arbitrator, this is really only suitable for a relatively simple case involving a narrow, essentially factual, point. It is normally better to have one arbitrator appointed by each party and one (or, even better, three) neutral arbitrators, the appointments being made as for a conciliation commission. Those appointed by each party be able to explain further their state’s position, and be able to share what may be a considerable workload. Although it may be more common to have only three arbitrators (as in the Iran–US Claims Tribunal) this is not ideal since the chairman then needs the support of one of the two national arbitrators in order to reach a decision. He may therefore have to compromise, whereas three neutral arbitrators should be better able to reach an impartial decision.
Many multilateral and bilateral treaties contain arbitration clauses and, apart perhaps from a regional specialist tribunal like the European Court of Justice, rather more treaty disputes are decided by arbitration than by judicial settlement.
Arbitration is not necessarily cheaper or less complicated than judicial settlement. But the parties are better able to control the process (choice of arbitrators, language(s) and confidentiality). If they want a quick decision they can more easily direct the tribunal to finish by a specific date. This is helped by the fact that, even with five arbitrators, reaching a decision should be that much easier than with, say, the fifteen judges of the ICJ. But, such advantages have to be weighed against the fact that all the costs of the arbitrators, the registrar, other staff and accommodation have to be borne by the parties (normally in equal shares whatever the outcome), in addition to their own legal costs. And, since an arbitral tribunal has to be constituted for each case and its rules of procedure may well have to be agreed, the mere setting up of the tribunal can take many months.
American and European cultures have different understandings of what harassment consists of. Generally speaking, Europeans have a broader view of what type of behavior is acceptable. Harassment based law suits are often seen as frivolous. In the US the norm is more strict.
Different cultural perspectives also lead to different interpretation of the law. On both continents it is the responsibility of an employer to safeguard the workplace against harassment and discrimination, but the consequences of misconduct are felt differently. In Europe it is the person who is found guilty of misbehavior who gets punished in the end. In America, it can also be her employer. No matter how large the organization, it is legally required to keep its managers and any other person with supervisory status under control. If it can’t, or one errant employee slips through the cracks, the employer can be held liable.
This is a reason why also companies that are known to be responsible and employee friendly can come across as extremely cold in a lawsuit, even when a harassed employee is personally affected. In its capacity as an employer the company has the burden of proof that the behavior of the offending employee, basically a third party for but not to whom it bears liability, towards the victim - also an employee, but for and to whom it bears a responsibility - did not happen.
He is no lawyer who cannot take two sides.
- Charles Lamb
I’ll never discuss my lawyer’s character in his absence, so let’s discuss his absence of character!
- Michael Lara
“Lawyers Are”: Those who use the law as shoemakers use leather; rubbing it, pressing it, and stretching it with their teeth, all to the end of making it fit their purposes.
- Louis XII
Lawyers are the only profession where the more there are, the more are needed!
- Robert Lucky, IEEE Spectrum
Lawyers are like rhinoceroses: thick skinned, short-sighted, and always ready to charge.
- David Mellor, British Conservative politician.
“Lawyers Are”: One who protects us against robbery by taking away the temptation.
- Henry Louis Mencken
The law is a sort of hocus-pocus science that smiles in your face while it picks your pocket.
- H.L. Mencken
“Lawyers Are”: People whose profession it is to disguise matters.
- Thomas More
I don’t want a Lawyer to tell me what I cannot do; I hire him to tell me how to do what I want to do.
- J.P. Morgan
Lawyers are like beavers: They get in the mainstream and damn it up.
- John Naisbitt, in Megatrends