Appellant is a temporary worker staffing company servicing client companies throughout the El Paso region. Jamrowski was a temporary worker for one of Appellant’s client companies. Although the temporary workers work on-site for Appellant’s client companies, the workers are ultimately employees of dmDickason and are subject to Appellant’s corporate policies and procedures. The dmDickason Employee Handbook ("Handbook") contains an acknowledgment page at the outset of the document stating that the employee acknowledges the Handbook does not cover all corporate policies in detail. The acknowledgment page also contains the following language: “I also understand that the provisions in the Handbook may be changed at any time by dmDickason and that in certain circumstances; dmDickason may choose not to follow the provisions in the Handbook.” Two copies of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Policy Agreement ("Agreement") are contained in the Handbook and listed in the Handbook’s table of contents as attachments. One copy must be returned to dmDickason and one is for the employee’s records. The Agreement requires employees to submit any disputes between them, dmDickason, or dmDickason’s client companties “relating to or arising out of an employee’s recruitment, hiring, employment, or . . . termination of employment[]” to binding arbitration. The Agreement contains the following provision: “dmDickason may change or modify this arbitration policy from time to time without advance notice or the consent of employees. However, with respect to any claim for which a demand for arbitration has been filed with the AAA, dmDickason will not modify or change the agreement between you and dmDickason to use final and binding arbitration to resolve employment-related disputes without notifying you and obtaining your agreement to such changes.” Jamrowski filed suit in district court and brought employment claims against Appellant and Appellant’s client company. Appellant moved to compel arbitration, which the trial court denied. An appeal followed. Is the arbitration clause an illusory promise? Why or why not?