Ninth Circuit Upholds Employment Arbitration Agreement And Class Waiver

by BakerHostetler

But Can The Good Guys Avoid A Last Second Goal In This Case?

The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdales, Inc., Case No. 12-55578 (9th Cir. June 23, 2014), should have employers feeling as good as the U.S. Men’s Soccer team up through the fourth minute of added time in the second half of their match against Portugal. But, is fancy-boy Christiano Renaldo again racing down the side of the pitch, ready to deliver a heartbreaking assist?

[Editor’s Note: Frankly, the use of the World Cup metaphor in discussing this case is clumsy at best. However, nearly 72 hours after the end of the U.S./Portugal match, we find ourselves still seething over the draw that was snatched from the jaws of a win. The hope is that the writing of this article will provide the author with a much-needed catharsis. We’ll see.]

The plaintiff in Johnmohammadi was a sales associate for Bloomingdale’s (one of Renaldo’s favorite places to get facials and have his eyebrows waxed). She filed a proposed class action alleging that Bloomingdale’s unlawfully failed to pay overtime to its associates. In response, Bloomingdale’s pointed out that the materials the plaintiff received when she was hired included an arbitration agreement with a class action waiver provision. The plaintiff was given 30 days to sign and return an opt-out form that would have voided both the arbitration agreement and the waiver, but failed to do so. On that basis, Bloomingdale’s argued that the plaintiff was required to arbitrate her individual claim, and was barred from seeking class-based relief. The district court agreed and dismissed the case in favor of arbitration.

On appeal, the plaintiff made an interesting argument. She claimed that the arbitration agreement was comparable to an employer offering a benefit to employees, such as a raise, to dissuade them from engaging in concerted activity, i.e., voting for union representation. The National Labor Relations Board holds that such an offer is actually a disguised (and unlawful) threat that the employer will take benefits away if the employees exercise their right to act concertedly, i.e., “the iron fist in the velvet glove.” (Speaking of iron, did you know that Renaldo uses so much hair product that his hair is three times harder than solid steel? True story.)  According to the plaintiff, Bloomingdale’s offered her the “benefit” of arbitration to dissuade her from preserving her right to engage in concerted activity, i.e., to seek class-based relief.

The Ninth Circuit wasn’t buying it. The court held that the plaintiff could prevail on her “iron fist/velvet glove” theory only by showing that Bloomingdale’s offered a benefit that was “immediately favorable” to its associates. After concluding that arbitration may come with “disadvantages” for employees, the court found that the plaintiff was unable to make this showing. Accordingly, it rejected her theory and affirmed the district court’s order compelling arbitration.

(Let’s pause for just a moment to enjoy the irony of the above.  In short, the plaintiff was arguing that the arbitration agreement was unlawful because it was just too good a deal to pass up. The Ninth Circuit disagreed and found that the arbitration agreement was perfectly appropriate because there was a decent possibility that the plaintiff would lose. Strange days, indeed.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming.)

So, what’s with all the hand-wringing Renaldo references (and gratuitous personal attacks)? Well, the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning leaves two open questions that may be cause for concern.  First, the Ninth Circuit held that the National Labor Relations Board’s D.R. Horton ruling (discussed here) was not implicated because the plaintiff had an opportunity to opt out of the arbitration agreement, and was not forced to accept it as a condition of employment. While that remark may not be cause for alarm on its own, the court also observed that “there is some judicial support” for the proposition that the filing of a proposed class action is protected, concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act. Taken together, these comments might suggest that the Ninth Circuit has not yet recognized the folly of the NLRB’s D.R. Horton decision. (Ok, that’s probably a somewhat subjective manner of phrasing the issue.)

The second question has to do with the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning in rejecting the plaintiff’s “iron fist/velvet glove” theory. The court analyzed the question from the perspective of whether arbitration is enough of a benefit to support such an argument. But, given the undisputed fact that the arbitration agreement was not a mandatory condition of employment, there is a much larger question as to whether the “iron fist/velvet glove” theory could ever apply. The rationale for this theory, as explained above, is the implicit threat that “the employer can giveth, and the employer can taketh away.” But, an employer cannot unilaterally taketh away an employee’s right to bring a class action. That right can only be surrenderedeth by the employee.

Is this a distinction without a difference? Maybe. But, what about those employers who offer a payment to employees as an incentive against opting out of non-mandatory arbitration agreements? How would the Ninth Circuit analyze that case?

Bottom Line: While recent case law from the Supreme Court has been favorable toward arbitration, the case law is still developing around arbitration agreements and class waivers in the employment context. Furthermore, writing a blog article is insufficient to relieve the disappointment of a senseless World Cup loss. Here’s hoping that the Germany match makes the Portugal draw nothing but an amusing bit of trivia!


Written by:


BakerHostetler on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.