Avoiding Professional Pitfalls

Imagine this: You see a post from a “doctor” online, only to later discover it wasn’t the real expert at all. In today’s digital age, impersonation isn’t just a harmless prank—it’s a dangerous trend that deceives the public and undermines trust in professional expertise. I’ve see fake profiles on social media to deep fakes mimicking trusted voices. These practices are deceptive and can spread misinformation at alarming speeds. I’m speaking from personal experience: as a doctor, I recently discovered that my TikTok account is being impersonated. There are 10+ clone accounts I’ve found with diffent spins and I’m getting a barrage of messages at present from people saying that they’ve fallen victim to one of these fake accounts posing me as as an inappropriate lesbian nurse looking for a partner. WTF 🤬 This isn’t just a case of stolen identity—it’s a situation that can have serious consequences for public health and safety. When people see content coming from a profile that appears to represent a trusted medical professional, they might take harmful advice seriously or be taken advantage of/exploited in other ways. I’m one of many examples that are emerging every day, where impersonators use our names and credentials to promote inaccurate or even dangerous information. The consequences are real: public confusion, misguided decisions, and a significant erosion of trust in legitimate professionals. We need to call attention to this harmful practice. I urge platforms, regulators, and the community to work together to safeguard our digital spaces and ensure that professional identities are protected. Let’s stand united against DIGITAL DECEPTION—because our credibility and your safety depend on it. #DigitalTrust #OnlineSafety #Impersonation #HealthcareProfessionals

𝗠𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝗹𝗸 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗖𝗠𝗔 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗿𝗴𝘂𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗹𝗮𝘄. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗡𝗢𝗧! 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲, 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀  • Not because the law was against them.  • Not because the facts were against them.  • Because their procedure was wrong. A late referral. An incorrectly cited party. A pre-arbitration minute signed without understanding what was just agreed to. A witness who wasn't ready. A jurisdictional point never raised. The Labour Relations Act guarantees fairness. The Constitution protects labour rights. The Basic Conditions of Employment Act sets the floor. 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗮𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗶𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗯𝗿𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻. Recent Labour Court judgments have made one thing unmistakably clear: 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙘𝙚𝙙𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙩𝙚𝙘𝙝𝙣𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮. 𝙄𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙤𝙣 𝙬𝙝𝙞𝙘𝙝 𝙤𝙪𝙩𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙗𝙪𝙞𝙡𝙩. 𝙋𝙧𝙚-𝙖𝙧𝙗𝙞𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙨 are no longer just admin meetings. They 𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙚s. They bind the parties. By the time arbitration begins, the outcome may already have been shaped — by what was agreed, and by what was left out. 𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙧𝙚-𝙖𝙧𝙗𝙞𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙢𝙞𝙣𝙪𝙩𝙚 is one of the most dangerous documents in the process. Once you sign it, you are bound by it. 𝙑𝙞𝙧𝙩𝙪𝙖𝙡 𝙝𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙨 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙖𝙙𝙙𝙚𝙙 𝙖𝙣𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙡𝙖𝙮𝙚𝙧 𝙤𝙛 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙘𝙚𝙙𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙠 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙡𝙡 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙨𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙤𝙪𝙨𝙡𝙮 𝙚𝙣𝙤𝙪𝙜𝙝. If you work in HR, represent employees or employers at the CCMA, or advise on labour matters, this article is worth reading. 𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗹𝗮𝘄. 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀. #𝙇𝙖𝙗𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙇𝙖𝙬 #𝘾𝘾𝙈𝘼 #𝙃𝙍𝙋𝙧𝙤𝙛𝙚𝙨𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡𝙨 #𝙀𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙤𝙮𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙇𝙖𝙬 #𝙎𝙤𝙪𝙩𝙝𝘼𝙛𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙇𝙖𝙬 #𝙒𝙤𝙧𝙠𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙘𝙚𝘿𝙞𝙨𝙥𝙪𝙩𝙚𝙨 #𝙇𝙚𝙜𝙖𝙡𝙋𝙧𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙚 #𝙏𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙜𝙝𝙩𝙇𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙝𝙞𝙥

Exposure vs. Being Exposed: Navigating the Thin Line in Senior Stakeholder Presence One of my past managers once shared a crucial piece of advice regarding presenting to senior leadership. He said: "There is a very thin line between exposure (advertising your personal brand) and getting exposed (seniors picking up if you are fooling around)." This distinction has stayed with me throughout my career. When you step in front of senior leaders or the board, the spotlight is bright, but the risks are real. Here is how I’ve learned to navigate that thin line: 1. Preparation is Substance, Not Just Optics: True "exposure" comes from being prepared to discuss the details, not just making a good initial impression. If you don't know your numbers or your strategy, you are just waiting to get exposed. 2. Honesty Over Guesswork: If you get a question you can't answer, don't bluff. Senior leaders have a highly tuned radar for authenticity. It is far better to say, "I don’t have that specific data right now, but I’ll follow up," than to risk your credibility on a guess. Silence on a detail is temporary; a loss of trust is permanent. 3. Focus on the Outcome, Not the Credit: Don't present just to be seen. Present to drive a decision or solve a problem. High-level stakeholders are experts at sniffing out posturing versus genuine strategic alignment. 4. Humility Wins Over Hubris: The moment you try to manage the optics rather than the reality, you risk losing your edge. Authenticity is a core pillar of executive presence. What advice have you received about stepping into the senior leadership arena? I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments. #ExecutivePresence #Leadership #StakeholderManagement #ProfessionalDevelopment #CareerAdvice #PersonalBrand #Integrity

We live in scary times for hiring. Before, you had a CV and past employer references. Done. Today we operate in an era of perfect personal brands: Nice-looking profiles Impressive titles A million five-star online testimonials and reviews Here’s the reality (and I’ve seen this firsthand in marketing): • Testimonials can be bought. • Reviews can be faked. • People can claim ownership of projects they barely touched. • Subcontractors love to inflate their role into “I did the whole thing.” Online is easy to scam. A "nice" person may be a slick liar. A polished website or a stack of reviews? They mean nothing without verification. So what actually matters? ✅ Case studies with real company names, timeframes, and deliverables. ✅ Public portfolios that show work under their name, not a Google doc with links in it or random claims ✅ References from current or past clients, not just friends playing along. If you’re hiring contractors, freelancers, remote creatives, or coaches, don’t get fooled by the smoke and mirrors. Lying is increasing as people develop personal brands that are 98% based on hype with 2% truth. Words are cheap. Presentation can be faked. Only verified results are real proof. Verify or you may really regret it.

Overselling Can Harm Your Credentials 🚨 Personal branding matters—but overselling can damage trust. When every small task becomes a “major achievement” or every routine project is called “transformational,” people notice. Recruiters notice. Clients notice. Colleagues too. 👀 The risk is simple: expectations rise faster than capability. If your profile promises excellence but delivery feels average, credibility drops instantly. And rebuilding trust is never easy. Strong professionals do not need exaggerated titles or inflated claims. Real credentials speak through results, consistency, and impact. 📈 Instead of saying: ❌ I am the best negotiator in the industry Show this: ✅ Reduced sourcing costs by 12% through supplier renegotiation Facts create confidence. Hyperbole creates doubt. Your reputation is not built by loud claims—it is built by evidence, actions, and outcomes. 💡 Be visible. Be confident. But stay authentic. Because credibility is a career asset you cannot afford to lose. 🔑 #CareerGrowth #PersonalBranding #Leadership #Credibility #LinkedIn

A few years ago, I met a CEO who was confused about why his team wasn’t working well: → Morale was low → People were leaving → Results were below expectations Initially, he thought that the culture was the issue. Until we realized the issue was the way how he hired. He had made one mistake after another but he couldn't see them. This happens a lot. Most hiring mistakes don’t show up right away. They slowly damage what you're trying to build. Here’s what I’ve noticed from working with leaders: → A perfect resume can hide big issues → Rushing to hire often leads to regrets → And the wrong mindset on a team spreads like wildfire Here are 9 key mistakes I’ve seen (and how to fix them): 1️⃣ Overvaluing experience → Many years on a resume doesn’t mean future success → Look for curiosity, a learning mindset, and adaptability 2️⃣ Ignoring cultural fit → A hire who doesn’t match your values will deeply hurt → Hire for values and attitude first, skills second 3️⃣ Asking weak questions → Like “What’s your strength?” don’t reveal much → Ask how they’ve grown or handled challenges 4️⃣ Relying too much on resumes → A polished resume doesn’t show who they really are → Use interviews and tasks to uncover their character 5️⃣ Focusing only on talent → A star who can’t work with others will destroy culture → Hire people who help everyone around them do better 6️⃣ Ignoring integrity → Skills change, but honesty doesn’t → Make the character a must-have in hiring 7️⃣ Skipping real tests → Interviews can miss how someone works in real life → Use tasks or scenarios to test their abilities 8️⃣ Overlooking potential → Hiring for today’s needs creates gaps for the future → Choose people who can grow with your company 9️⃣Rushing the process → Fast hiring often leads to bad decisions → Take your time to assess mindset, fit, and potential In summary... Hiring isn’t just about filling a job. It’s about building the best possible team to fulfill your vision as a leader. I'm curious: Which mistake have you seen the most? ♻️ Repost it to help leaders avoid these mistakes and follow Andrea Petrone for more.

DO NOT DO IT! I came across a profile who claims to be my colleague till present here on LinkedIn but has never worked in my organization and we don’t have a position for the claimed job role. Lying on your CV or LinkedIn profile might seem like a shortcut to landing a job, but it carries serious risks that could have long-lasting effects on your career and legal standing. The extent of these consequences depends on various factors, including the specific lie, the context, and local laws. These are some of the potential legal and professional consequences: 📌 Background Check Failures Many employers conduct background checks, and if discrepancies between your claims and the actual records are found, it will disqualify you from the job. 📌 Termination of Employment If you lie about your experience, qualifications, or previous employment and this lie is discovered after being hired, the employer can legally terminate your employment. Many companies have clauses in employment contracts allowing termination if an employee is found to have provided false information during the hiring process. 📌 Legal Action for Fraud In some cases, lying on a CV or LinkedIn profile may be considered fraud or misrepresentation, especially if it leads to financial gains, such as obtaining a job or contract under pretences. Fraudulent misrepresentation can lead to: 👉 Civil lawsuits: Employers may sue for damages if the lie caused them harm (financial loss, missed opportunities). 👉 Criminal charges: In extreme cases, individuals may face criminal prosecution for fraud, although this is less common. 📌 Revocation of Professional Certifications Certain professions, like law, medicine, and finance, require licensure or certifications. If you lie about your qualifications or experience in these fields, you could face: 👉 Disciplinary action: Professional bodies can revoke certifications or licenses for dishonesty, making it impossible to practice in the field. 👉 Fines or other penalties: Professional governing bodies may impose fines or other penalties for ethical violations. Honesty and transparency are always safer paths, even if they require more time and effort to achieve career goals.

Hey, employers! Are your arbitration agreements actually enforceable? A federal appellate court just raised the bar. (Go grab some pearls for clutching. I'll wait.) A recent decision from the Third Circuit shows how courts are looking closely—not just at what arbitration agreements say, but also at how they’re rolled out. And even if a dispute doesn’t qualify for the new federal carveout for sexual harassment claims, employers still need to be ready to prove their agreements are enforceable. A former store manager sued her employer under Title VII, claiming a hostile work environment based on sex. She alleged her male supervisor treated her worse than her male peers, denied her promotions and pay, and bombarded her with rude messages. She said she complained repeatedly, but the company took no action. Eventually, she was fired and later sued. The company moved to compel arbitration, pointing to an arbitration agreement introduced years earlier. The employee had completed a training module that explained the agreement and how to opt out (she didn’t). The district court agreed and dismissed the case. The appellate court disagreed—partly. The Third Circuit upheld the district court on one point: The case didn’t fall under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA). Why not? Because the law only applies to disputes that arise or accrue after March 3, 2022. Even though the employee filed her EEOC charge later, her claims stemmed from conduct—and internal complaints—years earlier. 💡Takeaway: Filing a complaint in 2023 won’t exempt an older dispute from arbitration under the EFAA. But here’s the twist: the Third Circuit said the trial court jumped the gun on enforcing arbitration. Why? Because it relied on documents outside the complaint—like the training module and HR declarations—without giving the employee a chance to take discovery. That matters because the employee raised real questions about how clear the arbitration agreement was: ❔Did the policy clearly explain that she was waiving her right to sue? ❔Was the agreement buried in training materials? ❔Were key terms scattered across different documents? The court didn’t decide whether the agreement was enforceable—only that those questions deserved more scrutiny. So what should employers do? Even if your arbitration policy is legally sound, how it was introduced matters. Expect that a court will want to see: 🪟Clear, unmistakable language waiving court access 🔎Evidence that employees understood what they were agreeing to 🤝A fair process—especially if the rollout was digital or passive And if the dispute arose before March 3, 2022? The EFAA probably won’t apply—but that won’t save you if your agreement is murky. Arbitration is still a useful tool—but employers have to earn it. Clear rollout, clean language, and proof of assent are vital elements of an enforceable agreement. #TheEmployerHandbook #employmentlaw #humanresources

A Few Thoughts on How We Present Our Professional Involvement Here on #LinkedIn I’ve noticed a trend recently among young professionals here on LinkedIn, the increasing rush to affiliate ourselves, certification, our work, etc. with renowned organisations like W.H.O, UNICEF, UN and others. While the idea of personal branding is valid and encouraged, I think we need to be careful not to inaccurately portray our engagement with these organizations. I’ll explain why. But first, a few examples to give context: - You attend a webinar hosted by an organization that has no direct connection to WHO, but because WHO was mentioned somewhere in the content, you announced that you’ve just completed a WHO-supported webinar. - You join a WhatsApp community or temporary project group coordinated by volunteers who happen to be engaging with UN, and then you post that you’ve started a role with UN. That’s not how it works. I recently joined a voluntary knowledge community on AI for Health to share ideas and contribute to policy discussions. During the onboarding call, the facilitators spent most of the time reminding participants not to misuse organisation’s logo or claim official affiliation, because it had become a common problem. I’ve made this mistake myself in the past. Now, let me tell you why it’s wrong: - People (especially those ahead of you professionally and can support your growth) usually know what’s genuine or what’s not and the attempt to brand yourself this way becomes counterproductive. - Most of these organizations have strict policies regarding the use of their brand identities (names, logos etc). If they choose to enforce it, you could face legal consequences. - Misrepresenting or hyper-inflating your involvement can create a false sense of achievement, which might make you complacent. If you must fake it till you make it, do it intelligently. There are other consequences, but I’ll stop at these three. What should you do instead? - Partly detach your sense of progress from big names: It’s fine to aspire, but acknowledge your current state and keep working towards the next. - Be clear and accurate about your involvement: e.g. If you’re volunteering on a specific project, say exactly that. If you’re unsure how to phrase it, ask the organizers before posting. - Keep aspiring, but stay grounded: Build real credibility through consistent, honest work. Any thoughts? Share in the comment section. #linkedIn #career #professionals #development

🚨 𝗛𝗶𝗱𝗱𝗲𝗻 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗽 𝗶𝗻 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗟𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀? 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗕𝗹𝗲𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗶𝗱 𝗢𝗳𝗳!🚨 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐧𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐬. 𝐀𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝? ⚖️ 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐒𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐭? In 𝐃𝐮𝐬𝐡𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐉𝐚𝐧𝐛𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐡𝐮 𝐯. 𝐌/𝐬. 𝐇𝐲𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐢 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚 𝐏𝐯𝐭. 𝐋𝐭𝐝. the Supreme Court was asked: ❓ Can disputes like wrongful termination or wage delays—governed under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and Payment of Wages Act, 1936—be referred to arbitration? 📌 The Court said NO.These are 𝐧𝐨𝐧-𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 statutory rights. But if an arbitration clause exists in the appointment letter, the employer 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Yes, even if the clause is invalid or the dispute is non-arbitrable! 💣 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐲 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐫: Most appointment letters include one-sided arbitration clauses like: "𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫..." 🚫 This is *𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞*. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held such clauses to be 𝐯𝐨𝐢𝐝, as they violate principles of neutrality. 🧑⚖️ 𝐒𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐑𝐮𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐂𝐚𝐧’𝐭 𝐈𝐠𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐞: 1. TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. (2017) > A party interested in the outcome cannot appoint an arbitrator. 2. Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd. (2019) > Even a unilateral nomination right held by an interested party is invalid. 3. Central Organisation for Railway Electrification v. ECI-SPIC JV(2024) > Unilateral appointment creates *doubt over impartiality*—violates public policy. 4. SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning (2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754) > Courts will *not stop arbitration*, even if the dispute is non-arbitrable—they only check if an arbitration clause exists! 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐢𝐬𝐤: Once the arbitration clause is in place: ⓐ You *cannot object to arbitration* before High Court or SC. ⓑYou’ll be dragged into *arbitration first*, even for wrongful terminations or wage disputes. ⓒ*Courts won’t interfere* unless the final award is *perverse* (see *MMTC Ltd. v. Vedanta Ltd. (2019) 4 SCC 163*). 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐇𝐑 & 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐃𝐨 𝐍𝐨𝐰: 1. Ban one-sided arbitrator clauses—no director, no manager, no in-house list. 2. Use neutral ADR methods—like mediation or conciliation—as first step. 3. Limit arbitration clauses to non-labour matters like: * Lock-in period disputes * Confidentiality breaches * Bonus payment issues 4. Seek express written consent if unilateral appointment is proposed (rarely enforceable). 5. The validity of some flexible arbitration clauses is *still under review*