Legal Effect of the Arbitration Clause on Consumers
The legal effect of the arbitration clause on consumers is the fact that the clause once the customers purchase items from Dracca, they enter into a binding clause, which confines them to only one arbitrator who in this case is chosen by the company itself. Per se, the binding clause bars consumers from seeking the intervention of the court as it is explicitly stated in the standard-form contract. Consumers are denied an opportunity to seek justice from the court in a scenario where he or she is dissatisfied by the verdict made by the arbitrator. There is a possibility that the company in its own favor often influences the arbitrators decision.
Consumers must not necessarily put up with the verdict passed by the arbitrator because of the fact that the decision is always in support of the contract even though it may be found to be faulty. Besides, the arbitrator always seems to favor the company, which makes it ineffective and reliable to make appropriate decision for the customers. A case example is on involving Stolt-Nielson S.A. versus Animal Feeds Intl Corporation over an arbitrators use of class procedures where the Supreme Court was compelled to grant a review on the case.
Prevalence of the Spanish-Speaking Consumers in Invalidating the Arbitration Clause
The two Spanish-speaking consumers have a greater chance of prevailing in invalidating the arbitration clause should the court establish the truth that certainly, the clause does not consider the diversity of language within the areas the company is involved in selling and marketing its products. Such information is crucially important and therefore, should be made explicitly clear and understandable. As such, MacIlwrath & Savage (2010) assert that the company ought to have taken into consideration the need to communicate effectively to their target customers in a way that they do not fall short of information, or rather fail to get the intended information. The court should be able to consider the fact that the information, which was intended for the companys target customers, was not well presented.
The contract is written in English, yet intended for Spanish-speaking consumers, who make up one third of the companys market. It unveils the negligence of the company in the need to understand their consumers, which is extremely unethical. The court should also be able to establish that the company could also be using the English written contract to hide vital information in a bid to get their business going without any impeding glitch. Besides, the court assumes that it is the responsibility of the company to provide relevant information to the customer before entering into the binding contract. Any valid contract for it to bind two parties should be reached when both parties are aware of all the legal issues implicated in the contract, which is not the case between the company and the Spanish-speaking consumers.
Ethical Concerns Regarding the Implementation of the Arbitration Clause and the Arbitration Process
Apropos the implementation of the arbitration clause, there is a clear mishap caused by the course because of the fact that it arouses quite a robust concern over the companys ethical consideration in its endeavors to serve its customers. The implementation overlooks the ethical issues emanating from the arbitration whereby the clause is out to favor the company at the expense of the customers. Besides, the arbitration process does not consider the possibility that the customer or complainant need a fair and just ruling. It explicates the negligence of the process over the need to uphold ethics in the companys operations.
In a bid to remedy these ethical concerns, Dracca could consider reviewing its standard-form contract regarding the arbitration clause as well as the arbitration process to be able to deal with customer complaints with diligence. In addition, Mallin (2009) states that the company could have tried to ensure that it incorporates customers satisfaction policies in its mission statement. It will provide guidelines on the appropriate approach to relate with customers. The company should strive to give precedence to the customer and profits will come in naturally. Precisely, the company should always embrace ethics in its operations as far as customer service and production is concerned.
Ethical Concerns Regarding Draccas Approach to the Litigation Process
Ethics is a very sophisticated facet in the handling of legal matters. Per se, attorneys always face ethical dilemmas in their line of legal practice. The defendants alike usually face the same situation, as it is the case for Draccas approach to the litigation process. Draccas attempt to hide relevant information that was to incriminate the company sparks many ethical concerns as the tamper could have compromised the whole litigation process. The companys endeavors to hamper the discovery and gathering of vital information unveil how unethical Draccas ambitions are. Besides, the ethical dimensions exemplified by the company arouse many questions over the conduct of the company in its operations. It is recommendable for Dracca to allow the court conduct its investigations free of its tampering.
As such, it should acknowledge the power that the court holds in resolving disputes that the companys arbitrator had failed to convey appropriately. According to Mallin (2009), Dracca should apologize to the two Spanish-speaking consumers and assure the customers that it shall for henceforth begin to uphold and prioritize good customer service to ensure that the customers as well as retailers are satisfied with the companys services at any point in time. Consequently, Dracca will be in a better position to remedy all the ethical concerns apropos its operations in the market.
Draccas Responsibility for the Actions of Hennings
Dracca is acutely responsible for the actions of Hennings due to the fact that the company realized the tampering of the faulty clasps by Hennings but still went ahead to sell the pack-and-play products without taking any action. It is evident in another dispute brought before the court over the safety of the Dracca Pack-n-Play Beach Model where four infants in three different countries succumbed to life-threatening injuries. A courts verdict to hold Dracca responsible for the mistakes by its employee will be a fair ruling in line with legal considerations involved in this case.
Besides, the fact that Hennings conducted the act that amounted to criminal charges and was not submitted before the court by Dracca clearly spells out why and how Dracca is responsible for its employees actions. Moreover, were it not for Draccas laxity to ensure that all its products are well intact and packed before release the four distinct accidents involving innocent kids would not have occurred and Dracca would not have faced any integrity questioning over its business conduct both in the market and within its own premises. Therefore, liability of Dracca on Hennings criminal actions is justifiable.
Internal and External Actions for Dracca to Resolve the Dispute Regarding the Pack-n-Play Clasps
Concerning Pack-n-Play clasps, Dracca should analyze both internal and external actions worth taking in a bid to resolve the problem conscientiously. MacIlwrath & Savage (2010) are of the view that Dracca should mobilize its employees to embrace a high level of ethics while working within its premises. As such, it should make sure that it strengthens employees relation with the management and familiarize them with the legal implications of their actions at any point in time as well as make sure that employees do not engage in malpractices that may put the company at jeopardy. Dracca should ensure that all the Pack-n-Play clasps are wellinspected and carefully packed before they are let out of the company. Considering the outside environment, Dracca should apologize to the public and ask them to return the purchased pack-and-play products so that they are inspected to make them safe for use in a bid to avoid any further accidents.