What can be done to reverse these trends? Arbitration providers make voluntary efforts to ensure that arbitration procedures provide appropriate protection for impartial procedures and decision makers. However, while making voluntary efforts by arbitration service providers and companies to improve formal procedures in their arbitration procedures are desirable, they do not address the fundamental problem that the current arbitration law allows the company to decide what type of arbitration to impose on its employees or customers. Voluntary measures cannot prevent companies that want to protect their interests – at the expense of employees and customers – from introducing provisions such as the waiver of class actions and the payment clauses of the losers, which prevent access to justice. Nor can they adequately address the bias of repetitive players. The parties must sign the arbitration agreement and the decision binds the parties. If you are a party to a contract and you wish to settle disputes with the help of an arbitrator without going to court, then you should conclude this agreement. A “dominant party” clause such as this tends to discourage reckless claims, counter-claims and defences as well as the discovery of scorched earth, in an arbitration procedure: In employment and the consumer, quite simply, the employer is probably a repeat player, while the employee or consumer is likely to be a one-shot player.56 How then can the advantage of the repeat player be compensated? One possibility is that the legal aid on each page will serve as an effective recidivism in the system. A large, highly sophisticated law firm representing the company could be compensated by an aggressive and demanding law firm representing the complainant. However, in practice, the legal representation of workers and consumers is much more divided and of varying quality than that of companies that, in general, can afford to recruit large and demanding firms to defend their affairs. In a study conducted by lawyers representing parties to work reconciliation, Colvin and Pike, That 76.6 percent of lawyers representing employers classified labour law as a primary area of practice, compared to only 56.7 percent of lawyers representing workers.57 In addition, 54.6 percent of employers were represented in this study by a law firm that dealt with several cases in the study population. , while only 10.7 per cent of employees were represented by a law firm. who dealt with several cases. While lawyers and law firms can provide some kind of redoubling of arbitration, this result shows that it is employers who are much more likely than employees to benefit from representation by this type of repetitive gambler.

Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 indicates that an arbitration agreement may take the form of a separate agreement or a compromise clause in the contract. Within 15 days of the start of the arbitration, each party selects a person as an arbitrator and the two arbitrators thus selected elect a third arbitrator within 30 days of the start of the arbitration. If the arbitrators chosen by the parties are unable to agree on the third arbitrator within the time limit, the third JAMS arbitrator is appointed in accordance with its rules. All arbitrators are neutral, independent and impartial arbitrators.