Meghann Patrick is a former employee of Altria Group Distribution Company. After her employment was terminated, Patrick sued Altria and a supervisor at Altria, alleging employment-related claims under the Missouri Human Rights Act. The defendants moved to compel arbitration and stay the civil action. The circuit court denied the defendants’ motion, and they appealed. Patrick was hired by Altria in November 2007 as a Territory Sales Manager. At the time she began her employment, Patrick agreed to a dispute resolution program that included an arbitration provision. In February 2012, Altria distributed to employees a revised dispute resolution agreement, which superseded the earlier agreement. Under the agreement, all workplace disputes were subject to mandatory and binding arbitration. The agreement gave Altria the power to unilaterally amend or terminate the dispute resolution program. In this case, the agreement gives Altria the unilateral right to make “material amendments” to the dispute resolution agreement, which may include “change[s] in the allocation of fees and costs, the Disputes covered, or the limitations on remedies.” Altria’s right to make material and unilateral modifications includes

(1) the agreement does not limit material modifications to prospective-only application; and (2) the agreement does not require Altria to give advance notice of material modifications to employees. Altria terminated Patrick’s employment in March 2016. Patrick filed an administrative complaint against Altria and supervisor John Hartnett with the Missouri Human Rights Commission. Following receipt of a right to sue letter from the Commission, Patrick filed suit against Altria and Hartnett. Altria filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Action. Patrick opposed the motion. She argued, among other things, that the dispute resolution agreement was not enforceable because it was not supported by adequate consideration. How should the appellate court rule on the motion to compel arbitration? Do you believe there was adequate consideration for the revised agreement to arbitrate? Why or why not?