Arbitration United States

Ninth Circuit Revives ABM Aviation Wage Arbitration

Published 2026-06-24 1 source Arbitration Award Enforcement Employment Law Ninth Circuit United States United States

Stories are grouped across languages, rewritten into a fixed editorial format, and linked to original sources. How we report.

TL;DR

  • The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court ruling against enforcing ABM Aviation's arbitration pact.
  • The dispute concerns wage claims brought by a former airport janitor, Robert Cocom.
  • The lower court had found the arbitration agreement unconscionable, referencing a similar but distinguishable case.
  • The appellate court determined that the ABM agreement was materially different and ordered arbitration to proceed.

Overview

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has reinstated ABM Aviation Inc.'s effort to compel arbitration in a wage dispute with former employee Robert Cocom, overturning a district court's previous denial of enforcement on unconscionability grounds.

What Happened

ABM Aviation Inc. sought to require a former airport janitor, Robert Cocom, to arbitrate his wage claims under an agreement signed during employment.

A federal district court denied enforcement, declaring the arbitration agreement unconscionable after comparing it to a different case in which a similar pact had been invalidated by a California appellate court.

The Ninth Circuit found key distinctions between ABM's arbitration agreement and the other case cited by the district court.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the challenged provisions in ABM's contract were materially different and therefore did not render the agreement unconscionable. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, sending the dispute to arbitration.

Context

The enforceability of arbitration agreements in employment disputes remains a contested issue, particularly concerning provisions around substantive fairness and unconscionability.

Federal courts-including the Ninth Circuit-frequently resolve such disputes by carefully analyzing contract terms and prior precedent.

Why It Matters

  • The ruling clarifies the standards under which federal courts will distinguish between unconscionable and enforceable arbitration agreements in wage-and-hour cases.
  • It reaffirms the judicial presumption in favor of arbitration, subject to careful scrutiny of contract specifics.

Sources

Related Stories