That seems to be a long article series. I've read most of the first article but haven't come across the data you referenced.

Would you mind highlighting the article with peer-reviewed sources and law professors explaining that "arbitration almost always rules in favor of the company and that arbitration companies which do rule in favor of individuals quickly find themselves getting no more business"?

Furthermore, even if it was true that "arbitration almost always rules in favor of the company", why would that alone be the sign of a problem? We shouldn't just assume that, for example, half of the victories will go to the company and half to the individual; we shouldn't assume any particular percentage breakdown without more information about who initiates arbitration and why. (The "priors", to make an analogy to Bayesian statistics)