Someone please explain to me the benefits of having forced arbitration at all; what's the benefit of having disputes (including sexual harassment disputes) resolved behind closed doors without any possibility of appeal?
For example, you mention sexual harassment; the victim (and certainly the accused) might not want all those details in the public record.
Corporations often insist on adding it to their employment contracts and employees almost never insist it be added to an employment contract that was missing it, so you can guess who it benefits.
Advantages are speed, privacy and cost. You also avoid the political risk of the court district that you are in.
In an individual vs company situation, it’s always better for the employer, unless the employee can hire the arbitrator. If the company hires the person, that arbitrator may find it difficult to get future work if they side with the company.
Without that, it's all on the company.
When employment contracts including a binding arbitration clause, the employee is agreeing to resolve conflicts privately with the company rather than through public means, such as a lawsuit. This reduces the public profile and resolution of such an action.
https://www.epi.org/publication/the-arbitration-epidemic/#ep...
Plus, private arbitration is private. The terrible things the companies do to employees don't end up on public records. You can't even tell how often they are being taken to inverse kangaroo court.
It's saying Google is removing forced arbitration from its employment contract.