the remedial measures in [Title VII] to serve as a spur or catalyst to cause employers to self-examine and to self-evaluate their employm .Ed.2d 217 (1987). Because the limitation on remedies found in the Circuit City arbitration agreement significantly undermines Title VII’s remedial purpose of making victims of discrimination whole and its deterrent purposes of forcing employers to eliminate and prevent discriminatory practices in the workplace, we hold that the provision at issue in this case was not enforceable. See Paladino, 134 F.3d at 1062 (noting that the arbitrability of discrimination “claims rests on the assumption that the arbitration clause permits relief equivalent to court remedies”) (emphasis added); Trumbull v. Century Mktg. Corp., 12 F.Supp.2d 683, 688 (N.D.Ohio 1998) (<HOLDING>); cf. Perez, 253 F.3d at 1286 (holding that
holding a court may not award punitive damages holding that arbitration agreement that did not provide for award of attorney fees to successful title vii claimant was unenforceable because the right to attorneys fees  is central to the ability of persons to seek redress from violations of title vii holding that title vii claim was subject to compulsory arbitration holding that under a severability clause arbitration provision was not rendered unenforceable because it contained an invalid limitation on punitive damages holding that an arbitration clause was unenforceable because it prohibited an award of punitive damages which was available to the plaintiff under title vii