Most witnesses to date have been individuals who have acted in the supervisor's capacity at various brokerage firms. Their background may consist of only a securities license acquired many years ago. Absent some continuing education in the area of security application, statistics, planning, etc., their background is relatively shallow. The same limitations noted above also exist with securities arbitrators. Most securities representatives work in a limited field and, absent continuing education, may not have that much insight into other areas nor might remember much of the licensing training.
Public arbitrators bring a varied range of experience and background to the arbitrations.
However, it is rather apparent in the interviews of these arbitrators that few really understand the major issues of securities application. Additionally, I think it is necessary to explain the purpose of what the arbitrators are actually there to do. It is not an opportunity to simply be active after retirement. To make these points most evident, I worked an arbitration with a law professor and an ex judge as chairperson. The plaintiffs attorney was second rate since he had missed not only the unsuitability of an investment, but the illegality.