This particular case does not seem to match the standard employment relationship as it seems to have been successfully demonstrated that Tesla had intentionally

This particular case does not seem to match the standard employment relationship as it seems to have been successfully demonstrated that Tesla had intentionally not informed her of their requirement for a forced arbitration contract until after she had accepted their offer and left her prior employer. That meant by the facts argued in this case the first time she became aware of the contract terms was after she was in a position were her ability to say no was negligible. Now, I think that there are also issues in real law that relate to whether contract terms are actually fair. I think someone (LegalEagle maybe?) had a video on YouTube about it, but as I vaguely recall things you could freely sign a contract where you took on all the costs of a venture, and none of the profit, and then somehow argue that the contract was so unfair that it isn't valid. *I am super fuzzy on this one, it's very much "I was bored watching YT some day" recollection* Now personally I think companies should not be able to force arbitration in general, because I agree with you as when we sign such agreements we don't really have a free choice about signing once you've got to new employee orientation day. I also don't think that force arbitration should be enforceable for criminal actions - and as I understand it, sex (or any) discrimination is often a criminal matter? Forcing arbitration allows a company to hide its behaviour, and avoid monitoring and similar to correct the behaviour.