Governor Kaine vetoed budget measures that would have eliminated funding for the current periodic inspection program on weights and measures in retail outlets.  A movement to study privatization of the program may gain support and come back as an issue during the 2010 session.  Past studies have shown the cost of weights and measures inspections to skyrocket if the program is privatized and paid for by retail businesses.

A large coalition of business organizations, including the Virginia Retail Federation, will rally and hold a press conference on Tuesday, April 14, at the Omni Hotel in downtown Richmond.  The purpose of the gathering is to alert Virginia Senators Warner and Webb that businesses throughout the state will not tolerate a "yes" vote on Card Check, or the "Employee Freedom of Choice Act."  The legislation, which has passed the House of Representatives, would allow employees of any business to unionize by merely signing a card rather than participating in the secret ballot process.

The business groups will meet at 1 p.m.  All businesses throughout the state are invited to participate.  Questions?  Contact Margaret Ballard, 757-406-9431, mballard@ retail-alliance.com.

To contact Senators Warner and Webb, go to:

For more than 80 years, arbitration has helped Americans settle disputes fairly, quickly and inexpensively, without having to file a lawsuit or navigate the court system. The Arbitration Fairness Act (H.R. 1020), introduced last month would change that.  In effect, H.R. 1020 will nullify arbitration agreements which exist in potentially millions of consumer, employment and franchise contract, leaving businesses with little recourse in the event of a dispute - except to file a lawsuit.

The Arbitration Fairness Act is touted as "consumer-friendly" legislation, allegedly allowing the public a choice in determining how resolve to conflicts with businesses or employers.  In reality, eliminating pre-dispute arbitration is tantamount to eliminating arbitration altogether.  Without a pre-dispute commitment to arbitration, inevitably one side will believe they have the upper hand - forcing the case into our already over-burdened court system.

Without arbitration, consumers with claims under $60,000 will likely be left with little recourse but to hire an attorney and file suit.  However, studies show that attorneys working on contingency generally require $60,000-$75,000 in damages before taking a case.  

A recent study of consumer arbitrations administered by the American Arbitration Association (AAA) Searle Civil Justice Institute at Northwestern University School of Law found that more than 98 percent of cases complied with the AAA's consumer due process protocol and that, on average, claims were resolved in approximately seven months - as opposed to two years or more for a civil lawsuit.  That same study found consumers prevailed in 53.3% of the cases filed, recovering an average of $19,255.

The Arbitration Fairness Act would dump too many cases into our courts, ultimately leaving most consumers out in the cold and businesses with no recourse but a court battle.  To oppose H.R. 1020, contact Senators Warner and Webb and tell them to preserve our current arbitration system.