When Uber cofounder Travis Kalanick announced his resignation as CEO on Tuesday, many of those who pushed for his ouster after years of management scandals credited Susan Fowler. In February, the former Uber engineer published a blog post outlining the sexual harassment, retaliation, and gender discrimination she claims to have experienced there. Uber promptly hired former US attorney general Eric Holder to investigate. On June 13, Uber released Holder's recommendations for fixing the company’s noxious culture, and his suggestions included a diminished role for Kalanick. The embattled CEO took a leave of absence later that day; he resigned one week later amid pressure from investors.

While it’s easy to trace the tremendous impact Fowler had on the $70 billion transportation juggernaut, Fowler---like other current and former Uber employees---probably won't see her day in court. Uber’s employment contract required signing a binding arbitration agreement stipulating that cases be settled privately by an arbiter instead of a jury. (The company says employees now have 30 days to opt out but did not say when it started allowing them to do so.) The arbitration agreement, like many others, also curbs class-action lawsuits by requiring employees to arbitrate disputes individually, although they can opt out of this too. (Uber requires drivers and riders to also sign arbitration agreements, but the language varies.)

One current engineer told WIRED that Uber’s arbitration agreement has kept at least two people from suing the company for sexual harassment and gender discrimination. Although signing the agreement does not preclude employees from filing suit, the engineer believes that Uber recognizes the chilling effect of mandatory arbitration. “When all of this went down, Uber was smart," the engineer says. "They hired Holder, and this made me realize that no other engineer would be seeking legal action against Uber, either. Who would want to go against the ex-attorney general of the US?"

Uber says it retained Holder to lead the investigation, not to defend the company. It also fired twenty people after a separate internal investigation. “We have taken strong actions to address claims of harassment, discrimination, and other inappropriate behavior and have established processes and systems to ensure the mistakes of the past will not be repeated," the company said in a statement. "We're focused on rebuilding trust with our employees and the communities we serve, and building a company and culture that we can be proud of."

Arbitration agreements are common, and occasionally controversial. Recent high-profile cases include last year’s sexual harassment cases against Fox News, Wells Fargo customers seeking redress in the bank’s bogus account scheme, and Uber’s attempts to prevent drivers from filing class-action lawsuits to secure employee benefits and protections.

Such agreements are especially prevalent in the tech sector, says Larry Organ, an employment lawyer representing a client suing Tesla for racial discrimination. Although an arbitration agreement can allow for mediation, settlements, and punitive damages, it “tends to reduce damages awarded very significantly, and it’s private,” Organ says. Arbitration also limits discovery and appellate rights. Last month, a federal judge denied Uber’s motion to compel arbitration in the trade-secrets lawsuit filed by Waymo, Alphabet’s autonomous-vehicle company. Waymo called Uber’s motion “a desperate bid to avoid the court’s jurisdiction.” Still, the courts tend to enforce arbitration in typical employment disputes.

Like some other employers, Uber’s arbitration agreement includes a waiver if employees want to file their complaint with an agency like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Employers don't worry much about this because government agencies have such a heavy workload, says Ramsey Hanafi, a partner at Quintana Hanaf who is representing a client with a pending lawsuit against WeWork.