FINRA Dispute Resolution Makes Great Progress on Implementing Task Force Recommendations

Indisputably

In December 2015, a FINRA Dispute Resolution Task Force issued its Final Report and Recommendations for improvements to the administration of its forum and its ADR processes.  (See my earlier blog post about it here.  The Report contained 51 separate recommendations.

Earlier this month, FINRA posted a draft Status Report detailing the progress FINRA has made on implementing or otherwise responding to the Task Force’s recommendations as of September 30, 2016.  (Since the Securities and Exchange Commission oversees and monitors FINRA, including its Dispute Resolution office, the SEC must approve any change to its arbitration or mediation codes.

The Status Report shows that, in just nine months:

  • The FINRA Board of Governors approved five rule-change proposals — all relating to arbitration — for filing with the SEC.  One of those proposals (relating to tweaking the arbitrator selection process to increase party choice) has already been approved by the SEC; a second (relating to adding a ground to allowable motions to dismiss) has been filed.  Presumably the other three will be filed shortly.
  • FINRA DR has implemented 17 other recommendations that did not require rulemaking.  FINRA classifies these changes as in the areas of “forum transparency, arbitrator recruitment and training, and case administration processes.”

I commend FINRA DR for moving so rapidly on implementing the Task Force’s recommendations.  For a regulator to be able to cut through the “red tape” inherent in any bureaucracy — here a securities self-regulatory organization with many differing constituencies to which it is accountable — is a testament to the fluidity, efficiency and efficacy of the organization.   It is also a model for how a regulated ADR administrator can constantly improve its processes and procedures to serve the disputants – the constituency with, at least theoretically, the right to control the arbitration and mediation rules.

                        author

Jill Gross

Professor Jill I. Gross has been a director of the Investor Rights Clinic (formerly the Securities Arbitration Clinic) since 1999. Professor Gross teaches the Investor Rights Clinic and Seminar, Mediation and Arbitration, and Securities Litigation and Enforcement. She has published numerous law review articles in the area of dispute resolution… MORE >

Featured Mediators

ad
View all

Read these next

Category

A Member Of The Mediators’ Mile High Club At Last

Today I found myself inducted into the Mediators' Mile High Club at 23,000ft when two young, remarkably similar looking girls seated in 16E and 16F needed my help. In addition...

By Geoff Sharp
Category

Difficult Conversations 101: Blaming Sarah

There appears to be no small amount of blame to spread around for the Republican's loss at the polls, much of it centering on Sarah Palin, as if she hadn't...

By Victoria Pynchon
Category

Using Creativity When Negotiating Commercial Disputes – A Challenge For Lawyers?

             “Negotiations which end in a resolution that satisfies all parties are rare”[1].  Why should we nevertheless strive for integrative win-win solutions rather than accepting that usually only one side...

By Anke Meier

Find a Mediator

X
X
X