The trial court properly denied the defendant employer’s motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s “standing” to bring the PAGA action he filed against the employer.   Requiring plaintiff to arbitrate whether he was an “aggrieved employee” with standing to bring a representative PAGA action would require splitting that single action into two components: an arbitrable “individual” claim (i.e., whether he was an independent contractor or employee under either the parties’ written arbitration provision or section 226.8 (discussed post), making it unlawful to willfully misclassify an individual as an independent contractor); and a nonarbitrable representative claim. A PAGA-only representative action is not an individual action at all, but instead is one that is indivisible and belongs solely to the state.