@Vincenzo -- Well, binding arbitration is only sort of binding. What I mean is that people who don't like a decision reached through arbitration can still take the matter up in court. Unlike mediation, though, the person griping about the arbitration decision have to prove it was somehow unfair. Otherwise, that decision might be ratified by a court and the complaining party is stuck with it (unless that decision is appealed, of course).
And that really is how things ought to be. Take a look at an insurance contract or something. There is a good chance there is a clause in there that says you agree to have all disputes under that contract settled through binding arbitration. Now, how many people read that clause when signing something or are even fully aware of what it means?
If binding arbitration is truly binding, the good Lord only knows what kind of boilerplate language people would throw into contracts and assume things will go their way simply because of an arbitration clause.