These companies presumably have these forced arbitration clauses in order to save money. There costs would increase if they no longer had these clauses. Where i

These companies presumably have these forced arbitration clauses in order to save money. There costs would increase if they no longer had these clauses. Where is that money going to come from? I'd suggest it probably comes from lower employee salaries. Further, the deck seems pretty stacked in favour of the company in court anyways. They have a team of lawyers each way more expensive than any lawyer I'll be able to afford. Not to mention the time and effort that would spent suing a company when I'd really rather be moving on with my life. So its not at clear to me that I'm worse off with forced arbitration. Without it, I'd have a lower salary and only slighter better chance of winning a suit against my employer.