Bricklayers Local 8 of Ill. v. W. Waterproofing Co.

• Decision Date: 27 March 2023
• Docket Number: 21-cv-03273
• Parties: BRICKLAYERS LOCAL 8 OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff, v. WESTERN WATERPROOFING COMPANY, INC., et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Central District of Illinois

1

BRICKLAYERS LOCAL 8 OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff, v. WESTERN WATERPROOFING COMPANY, INC., et al., Defendants.

No. 21-cv-03273

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division

March 27, 2023

OPINION AND ORDER

SUE E MYERSCOUGH, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is an action to compel arbitration pursuant to Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (LMRA), 29 U.S.C § 185. The parties-a labor union, a contractor, and a subcontractor-are involved in renovating the Willard Ice Building, a government office building in Springfield. The renovation is governed by a project labor agreement (PLA), to which all the parties here are signatories. The PLA also incorporates the participating unions' collective bargaining agreements (CBAs).

In the summer of 2021, Plaintiff Bricklayers Local 8 of Illinois filed two grievances with the Illinois AFL-CIO, the umbrella labor organization charged with administering the PLA. The Bricklayers claimed that Defendant Western Waterproofing Company-one of the project's prime contractors-improperly subcontracted installation work to Defendant Vector Construction without abiding by the terms of the Bricklayers' CBA.

The Bricklayers initially sought to resolve their claims under the PLA. The AFL-CIO, however, concluded that the dispute must be resolved under the Bricklayers' CBA. But when the Bricklayers tried to proceed accordingly, Western and Vector refused to participate. Western and Vector maintained, and continue to maintain, that only the PLA governed the Bricklayers' claims. The Bricklayers then brought this Section 301 suit to compel Western and Vector to arbitrate the grievances under the CBA.

This matter comes before the Court on the parties' crossmotions for summary judgment. See d/e 25; d/e 26; d/e 27. With no material facts in dispute, the Court finds that the Bricklayers' grievances are arbitrable under the CBA. The Bricklayers' motion is GRANTED, and Western and Vector's motions are DENIED.

I. BACKGROUND

The Court draws the following facts from the parties' statements of undisputed facts and the evidence they submitted. The Court deems admitted any facts not in dispute or disputed without an evidentiary basis. See L.R. 7.1(D)(2)(b)(2).

Plaintiff Bricklayers Local 8 of Illinois is a labor union and a local affiliate of the Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers International Union. Defendants Western Waterproofing Company and Vector Construction are construction contractors. The Bricklayers are a “labor organization,” and Western and Vector are “employers,” as those terms are defined in 29 U.S.C. § 185.

A. The PLA.

In 2019, the Illinois Capital Development Board began soliciting bids for a planned renovation of the Willard Ice Building in Springfield, Illinois. That November, the Bricklayers and fourteen other labor unions entered a project labor agreement (PLA) with the Capital Development Board. See Pl.'s Mot. Summ. J. ex. 2 (hereafter “PLA”), d/e 26-2, at 1. The unions contracted with the Capital Development Board under the auspices of the Illinois AFL-CIO Building Trades, an umbrella labor organization. Id.

The PLA governs the work done by three groups: “Unions,” “Prime Contractors,” and “Subcontractors.” See id. The PLA applies to all “Construction Work . . . to be performed by Prime Contractor(s) and all Subcontractors” during the renovation project. Id. Among other things, the PLA requires that participating Prime Contractors and Subcontractors execute a “Contractor Letter of Assent . . . prior to commencing Construction Work on the Project.” Id. § 1.2. Any Prime Contractor or Subcontractor who does so is “thereafter . . . deemed a party to the PLA.” Id. § 1.3. Western and Vector executed their letters of assent on May 6, 2021.

Article I of the PLA sets forth the agreement's “Intent and Purposes.” Article I also incorporates the signatory unions' collective bargaining agreements (CBAs). See id. § 1.6. (noting the signatories' “intent to respect the provisions of any other collective bargaining agreements that may now or hereafter pertain”). The “terms of each applicable collective bargaining agreement as determined in accordance with paragraph 1.6 are incorporated [into the PLA] by reference.” Id. § 1.7. By signing their letters of assent, Western and Vector agreed:

to be bound and abide by the terms of the following in order of precedence: (a) the applicable collective bargaining agreement between the Prime Contractor and one or more of the Unions made signatory hereto; (b) the applicable collective bargaining agreement between a Subcontractor and one or more of the Unions made signatory hereto; or (c) the current applicable area collective bargaining agreement for the relevant Union that is the agreement certified by the Illinois Department of Labor for purposes of establishing the Prevailing Wage applicable to the project.

Id. § 1.6. If there is a “variance or conflict, whether explicit or implicit,” between the PLA and the incorporated CBAs, the PLA “supersede[s] and control[s].” Id. § 1.7.

The PLA includes two discrete dispute-resolution procedures. The first of these procedures, set forth in Article V, applies to disputes “arising under a particular collective bargaining agreement.” Id. § 5. Article V provides, by reference to the incorporated collective bargaining agreements, that:

In the event a dispute arises under a particular collective bargaining agreement specifically not including jurisdictional disputes referenced in Article VI below, said dispute shall be resolved by the Grievance/Arbitration procedure of the applicable collective bargaining agreement. The resulting determination from this process shall be final and binding on all parties bound to its process.

Id. § 5.1 (emphasis added).

The second procedure applies exclusively to disputes within the subject-matter confines of the PLA. As set forth in Article VI, the PLA's “Jurisdictional Dispute Resolution Process” covers “jurisdictional disputes between and among Contractors, Subcontractors, and Unions.” Id. § 6.3; see also id. § 6.7 (“The primary concern of the Process shall be the adjustment of jurisdictional disputes arising out of the Project.”). Article VI provides that the “Process will be followed for any grievance or dispute arising out of the interpretation or application of this PLA by the parties.” Id. § 6.3. “All decisions made through the Process are final and binding upon all parties.” Id.

The Process requires that participating parties take several preliminary measures before a jurisdictional grievance may be arbitrated. Article VI provides that:

In the event of a dispute relating to trade or work jurisdiction, all parties, including the employers, Contractors or Subcontractors, agree that a final and binding resolution of the dispute shall be resolved as follows:

(a) Representatives of the affected trades and the Contractor or Subcontractor shall meet on the job-site within two (2) business days after receiving written notice in an effort to resolve the dispute. (In the event there is a dispute between local Unions affiliated with the same International Union, the decision of the General President, or his/her designee, as the internal jurisdictional authority of that International Union, shall constitute a final and binding decision and determination as to the jurisdiction of work.)

(b) If no settlement is achieved subsequent to the preceding Paragraph, the matter shall be referred to the local area Building & Construction Trades Council, which shall meet with the affected trades within two (2) business days subsequent to receiving written notice. In the event the parties do not wish to avail themselves of the local Building & Construction Trades Council, the parties may elect to invoke the services of their respective International Representatives with no extension of the time limitations. An agreement reached at this Step shall be final and binding upon all parties.

Id. § 6.6. If the parties cannot resolve their dispute at either of these steps, “the matter shall be immediately referred to the Illinois Jurisdictional Dispute Process for final and binding resolution of said dispute” through arbitration. Id. § 6.6(c).

The Process contemplates an eight-step arbitration procedure. As specified in Article VI, the “Order of Presentation in all Hearings before an Arbitrator” includes the following:

I. Identification and Stipulation of the Parties

II. Union(s) claiming the disputed work presents its case

III. Union(s) assigned the disputed work presents its case

IV. Employer assigning the disputed work presents its case

V. Evidence from other interested parties (i.e., general contractor, project manager, owner)

VI. Rebuttal by Union(s) claiming the disputed work

VII. Additional submissions permitted and requested by Arbitrator

VIII. Closing arguments by the parties[.]

Id.§ 6.12.

Article VI assigns the task of administering the Process to “the offices of the President and/or Secretary-Treasurer of the Illinois AFL-CIO, or their designated representative, called the Administrator.” Id. § 6.4. The Administrator's role is limited to determining whether a particular dispute falls within the Process's ambit. “If at any time there is a question as to the jurisdiction” of the Process, the Administrator “may participate in proceedings seeking a declaration or determination that the underlying dispute is subject to the jurisdiction” of the Process. Id. § 6.15.

B. The CBA.

The Bricklayers operate under an areawide CBA with the members of the Central Illinois Mason Contractors Association (CIMCA). See Pl.'s Mot. Summ. J. ex. 3 (hereafter “CBA”), d/e 26-3, at 3. The CBA sets forth the terms and conditions of masonry and bricklaying employment for...