36. Although there is no public registry listing all companies that require mandatory mediation of their employees, the disclosure statements that arbitration providers are required to publish contain the names of the companies involved. The most comprehensive and comprehensive case revelations that are currently available are those provided by the American Arbitration Association: www.adr.org/aaa/faces/aoe/gc/consumer. How can companies negotiating arbitration agreements ensure that they do not suffer from Catic`s fate? In other words, how do they avoid striking arbitration agreements that could apparently lead to unbalanced procedures? The Supreme Court`s decision deserves some positive and negative comments. The fact that the Supreme Court has not hesitated to properly apply foreign law and to debate foreign jurisprudence is a sign that the Polish judicial system is mature and well-suited to international standards of arbitration. Although companies are free to tinker with the rules they want for arbitration proceedings, many choose to incorporate by reference the rules of an established arbitration service provider. These arbitration service providers, such as the American Arbitration Association (AAA) or JAMS, will manage the arbitration process by conducting lists of arbitrators for selection parties, courtrooms where arbitration can be conducted, and standard rules or procedures. Organizations such as AAA and JAMS are important players in the arbitration system. While they are established as private non-profit organizations, they are also well-known organizations, subject to public pressure and confer legitimacy on arbitration.

A 1992 survey of dispute resolution procedures showed that only 2.1% of employers surveyed used mandatory arbitration37. 38 More recently, 7.6% of them were subjected to mandatory arbitration procedures for their employees.38 reported on a 2003 survey of 291 employers in the telecommunications sector, 14.1% of them had introduced binding arbitration procedures.39 However, employers who agreed to be the most important organisations, 22.7% of non-syndist workers in the organisations surveyed were covered by mandatory arbitrations. In this survey, the focus was on procedures for lower-level employees in the industry, such as employees. B customer service or technicians. Consumers have effective vindication arguments against arbitration in cases where it would be prohibitive for them to submit their claims. As we have seen above, the Supreme Court has not supported these arguments. Workers made effective arguments when arbitration combined with the prohibition of class actions wiped out their material rights to collective acts. While there is no guarantee that other courts will follow the example of the 5th Circuit, the recent Catic case shows that companies cannot be too careful in defining their arbitration parameters. “At the end of the day, the courts won`t necessarily save you from an arbitration decision, even if it seems to work in a way that`s not fair,” Leader said. Since companies that impose arbitration procedures are likely to have a record of decisions, they have the advantage of being able to choose the arbitrators who have decided for them.