Gutierrez

The United States Supreme Court has “rigorously enforce[d] agreements to arbitrate” civil disputes (Dean Witter Reynolds Inc v. Byrd (1985) 470 U.S. 213, 221 [ 84 L.Ed.2d 158 , 105 S.Ct. 1238 ]), including those in which employees and consumers rely on statutory claims (Green Tree Fin. Corp.-Ala. v. Randolph (2000) 531 U.S. 79, 89 [ 148 L.Ed.2d 373 , 121 S.Ct. 513 ] (Green Tree); Shearson/American Express, Inc. v. McMahon (1987) 482 U.S. 220, 223, 226 [ 96 L.Ed.2d 185 , 107 S.Ct. 2332 ]). The high court has, however, acknowledged the need to regulate arbitration to ensure that such claims may be properly vindicated in the arbitral forum (Mitsubishi Motors v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth (1985) 473 U.S. 614, 628, 637 [ 87 L.Ed.2d 444 , 105 S.Ct. 3346 ] (Mitsubishi)), a concern echoed by our own Supreme Court (Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 110 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 745 , 6 P.3d 669 ] (Armendariz)). Both courts have recognized the centrality of costs to that concern: excessive arbitral fees and costs could bar access to that forum resulting in a loss of the statutory claims. (Green Tree, at p. 90; Armendariz , at pp. 110-111…