Detroit Supervisory Employee Subject to Arbitration Agreement's CBA Exclusion

6th Circuit rules arbitration exclusion for employees covered by collective bargaining agreements applies to supervisory staff not under a CBA

Published on Feb. 26, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an arbitration agreement's exclusion clause for employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) should apply to a supervisory employee who was not subject to a CBA. The plaintiff, a long-time security supervisor at the Renaissance Center in Detroit, was part of a class action lawsuit over alleged racial discrimination, but the court found his claims 'involve' the unionized security officers covered by a CBA, triggering the arbitration agreement's exclusion.

Why it matters

This ruling has implications for how broadly arbitration agreement exclusions can be interpreted, potentially limiting the ability of supervisory employees not directly covered by a CBA to avoid arbitration if their claims are seen as 'involving' unionized workers. It highlights the need for employers to carefully craft arbitration agreements to clearly delineate which employees and claims are subject to the agreement.

The details

The plaintiff, a security supervisor at the Renaissance Center in Detroit for over 30 years, filed a class action lawsuit along with his unionized colleagues alleging racial discrimination. The defendants moved to compel arbitration based on an exclusion clause in the arbitration agreement that exempted 'an employee who is covered by a collective bargaining agreement.' Even though the plaintiff himself was not covered by a CBA, the court found his claims 'involve' the unionized security officers, triggering the exclusion. The 6th Circuit panel agreed with the district court's reasoning that the plaintiff's allegations of discrimination by the unionized security officers meant his claims were sufficiently 'involved' with the CBA-covered employees.

  • The plaintiff worked security at the Renaissance Center in Detroit for over three decades.
  • The plaintiff and his former colleagues filed a class action lawsuit in 2026 over alleged racial discrimination they faced on the job.

The players

Barnes

The plaintiff, a long-time security supervisor at the Renaissance Center in Detroit who was part of a class action lawsuit over alleged racial discrimination.

G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.

The defendant company that employed the security staff at the Renaissance Center and moved to compel arbitration based on an exclusion clause in the arbitration agreement.

6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

The federal appeals court that ruled the arbitration agreement's exclusion clause for employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement should apply to the supervisory plaintiff, even though he was not directly covered by a CBA.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“'[The plaintiff's] claims involve employees subject to a collective bargaining agreement, either as a part or as a necessary part,'”

— Judge Chad A. Readler, Writing for the 3-judge 6th Circuit panel (milawyersweekly.com)

What’s next

The case will likely return to the district court to determine next steps in the class action lawsuit, with the arbitration exclusion issue resolved in favor of the defendants.

The takeaway

This ruling highlights the need for employers to carefully craft arbitration agreements to clearly delineate which employees and claims are subject to the agreement, as courts may interpret exclusion clauses broadly to apply to supervisory staff whose claims are seen as 'involving' unionized workers covered by a CBA.