Fred Powell v. Anheuser-Busch Incorporated

MEMORANDUM

Anheuser-Busch, Inc. (“ABI”) appeals the district court’s January 8, 2010, order granting Fred Powell’s motion for reconsideration of the district court’s June 29, 2009, order compelling arbitration. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a), and we affirm.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (“CBA”) between ABI and Powell’s union, Teamsters Local Union No. 896 (“Union”), does not “clearly and unmistakably” require Powell to arbitrate claims of statutory discrimination. See 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, 556 U.S. 247 , 129 S.Ct. 1456, 1474 , 173 L.Ed.2d 398 (2009). Although it is unclear whether the district court relied on the lack of a clear and unmistakable waiver in granting Powell’s motion for reconsideration, we may affirm on any basis supported in the record, “even if it differs from the district court’s rationale.” Van Asdale v. Int’l Game Tech., 577 F.3d 989, 994 (9th Cir.2009) (internal quotation marks omitted).

We will not interpret a CBA to waive an individual employee’s right to litigate statutory discrimination claims unless the CBA waiver “explicitly] incorporates] ... statutory antidiscrimination requirements.” Wright v. Universal Mar. Serv.…