In Frame v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (1971) 20 Cal.App.3d 668, the court rejected respondent's argument that arbitration should not be required because respondent had brought his action on behalf of the class of persons affected by the contract at issue. "But if all employees similarly situated have signed the same arbitration agreement as that which respondent challenges, all are equally bound. If the agreement is valid, it is valid as to all members of the class. It would be inappropriate to allow respondent and the other members of the class he claims to represent to evade the terms of the agreement simply by bringing their action together as a 'class' rather than as individuals."