The trial court properly enforced an employer’s arbitration clause.  The clause was only minimally procedurally unconscionable, being presented on a take-it-or-leave-it basis by the employer which wielded greater economic power.  However, the clause was on a separate page.  It was short and clearly titled.  The page also warned the employee to read the clause closely. The clause was not substantively unconscionable.  It required (but also allowed) the employee to bring claims against other employees in arbitration.  Nor was it unconscionable to require the employee to pay the $200 arbitration fee after he breached the agreement by filing suit (and paying the court’s $435 filing fee).  Finally, the clause wasn’t unconscionable insofar as it required arbitration rather than administrative proceedings on the employee’s claims.  An arbitration clause is unconscionable only if it attempts to require an administrative agency to arbitration the agency’s prosecutorial claims.