Associated Builders & Contractors of W. Pa. v. Cmty. Coll. of Allegheny Cnty.
| Decision Date | 25 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 20-649,20-1933 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Parties | Associated Builders & Contractors of Western Pennsylvania; Arrow Electric Inc.; Hampton Mechanical Inc.; Lawrence Plumbing LLC; R.A. Glancy & Sons Inc.; Westmoreland Electric Services LLC; Gregory H. Oliver Jr.; Daniel Vincent Glancy; Robert L. Casteel; Jason Phillip Boyd; Robert A. Glancy IV, Plaintiffs, v. Community College of Allegheny County; Quintin B. Bullock, in his official capacity as President of the Community College of Allegheny County; Pittsburgh Regional Building Trades Council, Defendants. Associated Builders & Contractors of Western Pennsylvania; Hampton Mechanical Inc., Lawrence Plumbing LLC, and R.A. Glancy & Sons Inc., as individuals and on behalf of others similarly situated; Robert L. Casteel; Anthony Scarpine, as individuals and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Plum Borough; Pittsburgh Regional Building Trades Council, Defendants. |
W Scott Hardy, United States District Judge.
These consolidated cases involve claims brought by Plaintiff Associated Builders & Contractors of Western Pennsylvania (“ABC”) and some of its contractor members and their employees, challenging project labor agreements (“PLAs”) entered into by Defendant Pittsburgh Regional Building Trades Council (the “Building Trades Council”) and two public entities, Defendant Community College of Allegheny County (“CCAC”) and Defendant Plum Borough (collectively, the “Public Entities”). Plaintiffs seek to invalidate the PLAs alleging that they violate the United States Constitution the National Labor Relations Act, the Sherman Antitrust Act and Pennsylvania competitive bidding laws, while the ABC II Plaintiffs further allege that they are acting on behalf of classes of contractors and employees. Plaintiffs also seek damages for past injuries.
On December 22, 2020, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause why ABC I and ABC II should not be consolidated or otherwise coordinated for pre-trial proceedings because counsel for Plaintiffs had listed Associated Builders & Contractors of Western Pennsylvania et al. v. Community College of Allegheny County et al. (Civil Action No. 20-649 (“ABC I”)[1] as a related case on the associated Civil Cover Sheet when filing the Complaint in Associated Builders & Contractors of Western Pennsylvania et al. v. Plum Borough et al. (Civil Action No. 20-1933 (“ABC II”)), and because both cases had been assigned to this member of the Court. (Docket No. 55).[2] On January 21, 2021, the Court - noting that both cases also involve many of the same Plaintiffs and a common Defendant, that they raise nearly identical issues arising from language contained in the PLAs, and that the parties had indicated in response to the Court's order to show cause that they do not oppose coordinating or consolidating these actions for purposes of deciding motions to dismiss - found that ABC I and ABC II involve common questions of law and fact and that it is in the interests of judicial economy to decide all motions to dismiss in these actions in a single consolidated proceeding. (Docket No. 61). Accordingly, the Court ordered that ABC I and ABC II be consolidated for purposes of deciding any motions to dismiss filed therein. (Id.).
Presently before the Court is Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss Consolidated Complaints Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and brief in support (Docket Nos. 65, 66), as well as Plaintiffs' brief in opposition thereto (Docket No. 69) and Defendants' reply (Docket No. 72). The Court heard oral argument in the matter on January 12, 2022. (Docket Nos. 76, 77 (Transcript of Proceedings, hereinafter “Tr.”)). For the reasons set forth herein, Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part.
As Plaintiffs allege, on February 15, 2011, CCAC and the Building Trades Council entered into the PLA at issue in ABC I. (ABC I Docket No. 33, ¶ 21). According to that PLA, CCAC entered into the agreement in order to ensure the efficient, safe, quality, timely, and on-budget completion of its construction projects. (ABC I Docket No. 33-1 (the “CCAC PLA”), Art. I, § 1). The CCAC PLA provides that it was intended to achieve a timely and on-budget completion of the Project by:
The CCAC PLA provides that any contractor can bid for covered work, regardless of whether it performs work elsewhere on a union or non-union basis or whether its employees are union members. (CCAC PLA, Art. I, § 2). However, all contractors on a covered project must execute and become bound to the PLA while working on that project, and they must recognize the local unions affiliated with the Building Trades Council as the exclusive bargaining representatives of their craft employees working on that project. (Id. Art. I, § 2; Art. VI, § 1). Also, where the local union representing a contractor's craft operates a referral system (“hiring hall”), the CCAC PLA requires the contractor to look first to that hiring hall to secure its employees, and the unions are to exert their best efforts to recruit sufficient numbers of skilled craft workers to fulfill the contractor's needs. (Id. Art. VI, §§ 3, 7). According to the CCAC PLA, the local unions are to operate their hiring halls “in a non-discriminatory manner” and to make referrals without regard to any “obligations of union membership.” (Id. Art. VI, § 3). The CCAC PLA also states that employees will not be required “to join any Union or pay any agency fees or dues as a condition of being employed, or remaining employed, ” on a covered Project. (Id. Art. VI, § 8). The CCAC PLA makes an exception from the referral system for any contractors that do not have a preexisting relationship with one of the affiliated unions, and it permits those contractors to employ a certain number of “core employees” not referred by the unions. (Id. Art. VI, § 9). The CCAC PLA also provides that contractors retain the right to determine the competency of their employees, to reject any referral for any just reason, and to select their craft foreman and/or their general foreman. (Id. Art. VI, §§ 2, 3, 10). Further, if the unions fail to provide a contractor with satisfactory referrals within 48 hours, the contractors may hire from other sources. (Id. Art. VI, § 5). Additionally, the CCAC PLA requires contractors and subcontractors to contribute to the unions' pension and health-care funds. (Id. Art. XI, § 2).
Unlike the CCAC PLA, which covers CCAC construction projects generally, the PLA at issue in ABC II between Plum Borough and the Building Trades Council states that it “applies exclusively to the onsite construction of the new borough building (the ‘Project').” (ABC II Docket No. 1-2 (the “Borough PLA”), Art. I, § 1). Similar to the CCAC PLA, the Borough PLA provides that it is intended to ensure the timely and on-budget completion of the Project. (Id.). Also like the CCAC PLA, the Borough PLA provides that it is intended to foster the achievement of completion of the Project by avoiding potential strikes, standardizing terms and conditions of employment, permitting flexibility in scheduling, establishing dispute resolution mechanisms, and ensuring a reliable supply of skilled labor. (Id. Art. III, § 1).
In all other respects material to the consolidated cases, the Borough PLA is identical to the CCAC PLA. The Borough PLA is available to and will apply to any successful bidder for work on the Project. (Borough PLA, Art. I, § 2). The Borough PLA's terms apply to all contractors but non-union contractors may bring with them a certain number of “core” employees. (Id. Art. VI, § 9). However, where the appropriate local unions operate referral systems, union and nonunion contractors must both look first to those hiring halls to secure their employees, while retaining the right to reject any referral and to look elsewhere if the local unions fail to satisfy their hiring requirements. (Id. Art. VI, §§ 2-5). The Borough PLA states that unions “will exert their utmost efforts” to find skilled workers to satisfy the contractors' needs, to operate their hiring halls in a “non-discriminatory manner, ” and to refer employees without regard to any “obligations of union membership, policies, or requirements.” (Id. Art. VI, §§ 3, 7). Finally, the Borough PLA unequivocally states that, “[t]he employees covered by this agreement will not be required to join a union or to pay dues or agency fees as a condition of being employed, or remaining employed on the Project.” (Id. Art. VI, § 8). Additionally, the Borough PLA requires contractors and subcontractors to contribute to the unions' pension and health-care funds. (Id...
To continue reading
Request your trial