The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which in the past has gone out of its way to invalidate the use of mandatory arbitration in the employment context, recently issued a surprisingly favorable decision striking objectionable language contained in an arbitration agreement rather than invalidating the entire agreement because of the offensive language.

The decision by the appeals court in Poublon et al. v. C.H. Robinson Company et al., No. 15-55143 (9th Cir. Feb. 3, 2017), reversed a federal trial court ruling which had denied the employer’s motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s failure to pay overtime claims.  The Ninth Circuit was able to sever out the invalid portions because it concluded that overall the arbitration agreement, which contained a severability clause, was not tainted with illegality.

A copy of the Poublon decision is available here.

Members of the Equal Employment Advisory Council (EEAC) can read more here.