For many businesses, there are significant advantages in including arbitration clauses in managing costs and risks.$$ Arbitration is generally less unpredictable than litigation.$$ Arbitration provisions also allow companies to choose the forum or location where the arbitration will take place, minimizing the costs of dealing with disputes in far$-$off forums.$$ Some businesses, such as nursing homes, have opted for arbitration clauses because of concerns about the lack of sympathies juries may have for their industry.$$ Over the past decade, arbitration clauses have come into wide use in consumer contracts and use agreements for a vast array of products and services.$$ Here are some readings and resources that may be helpful to you on this topic:

Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice.

On Page $5$ of a credit card contract used by American Express, beneath an explainer on interest rates and late fees, past the details about

annual membership, is a clause that most customers probably miss. If cardholders have a problem with their account, American Express

explains, the company $$may elect to resolve any claim by individual arbitration.$$

Those nine words are at the center of a far$-$reaching power play orchestrated by American corporations, an investigation by The New York

Times has found.

By inserting individual arbitration clauses into a soaring number of consumer and employment contracts, companies like American

Express devised a way to circumvent the courts and bar people from joining together in class$-$action lawsuits, realistically the only tool

citizens have to fight illegal or deceitful business practices.

Over the last few years, it has become increasingly difficult to apply for a credit card, use a cellphone, get cable or Internet service, or shop

online without agreeing to private arbitration. The same applies to getting a job, renting a car or placing a relative in a nursing home.

Among the class actions thrown out because of the clauses was one brought by Time Warner customers over charges they said

mysteriously appeared on their bills and another against a travel booking website accused of conspiring to fix hotel prices. A top executive

at Goldman Sachs who sued on behalf of bankers claiming sex discrimination was also blocked, as were African$-$American employees at

Taco Bell restaurants who said they were denied promotions, forced to work the worst shifts and subjected to degrading comments.

Some state judges have called the class$-$action bans a $$get out of jail free$$ card, because it is nearly impossible for one individual to take on

a corporation with vast resources.

Patricia Rowe of Greenville, S$.$C$.,$ learned this firsthand when she initiated a class action against AT&T$.$ Ms$.$ Rowe, who was challenging a

$$600$ fee for canceling her phone service, was among more than $900$ AT&T customers in three states who complained about excessive

charges, state records show. When the case was thrown out last year, she was forced to give up and pay the $$600.$ Fighting AT&T on her

own in arbitration, she said, would have cost far more.

By banning class actions, companies have essentially disabled consumer challenges to practices like predatory lending, wage theft and

discrimination, court records show.

$$This is among the most profound shifts in our legal history,$$ William G$.$ Young, a federal judge in Boston who was appointed by President

Ronald Reagan, said in an interview. $$Ominously$,$ business has a good chance of opting out of the legal system altogether and misbehaving

without reproach.$$

More than a decade in the making, the move to block class actions was engineered by a Wall Street$-$led coalition of credit card companies

and retailers, according to interviews with coalition members and court records. Strategizing from law offices on Park Avenue and in

Washington, members of the group came up with a plan to insulate themselves from the costly lawsuits. Their work culminated in two

Supreme Court rulings, in $2011$ and $2013,$ that enshrined the use of class$-$action bans in contracts. The decisions drew little attention outside

legal circles, even though they upended decades of jurisprudence put in place to protect consumers and employees.

One of the players behind the scenes, The Times found, was John G$.$ Roberts Jr$.,$ who as a private lawyer representing Discover Bank

unsuccessfully petitioned the Supreme Court to hear a case involving class$-$action bans. By the time the Supreme Court handed down its

favorable decisions, he was the chief justice.

Corporations said that class actions were not needed because arbitration enabled individuals to resolve their grievances easily. But court

and arbitration records show the opposite has happened: Once blocked from going to court as a group, most people dropped their claims

entirely.

The Times investigation was based on thousands of court records and interviews with hundreds of lawyers, corporate executives, judges,

arbitrators and plaintiffs