Burkholder v. Int'l Union

• Decision Date: 19 March 2010
• Docket Number: Case No. 3:02CV7422.
• Parties: Earl W. BURKHOLDER, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs,v.INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL NO. 12, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio

700 F.Supp.2d 895

Earl W. BURKHOLDER, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs,v.INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL NO. 12, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 3:02CV7422.

United States District Court,

N.D. Ohio,

Western Division.

March 19, 2010.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Thomas A. Sobecki, Toledo, OH, for Plaintiffs.

Joan Torzewski, Harris, Reny & Torzewski, Carrie L. Sponseller, John T. Landwehr, Eastman & Smith, Toledo, OH, for Defendants.

ORDER

JAMES G. CARR, Chief Judge.

Plaintiffs, current and former machine repair employees of Daimler Chrysler at two Chrysler Jeep plants in Toledo, Ohio, bring suit alleging that various actions taken by union defendants (UAW International (International) and UAW Local 12 (Local 12)) gave preferential treatment to other skilled workers and thus violated the unions' duty of fair representation.

Jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

Pending are union defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. 180] and plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment [Doc. 189]. For the reasons discussed below, defendants' motion shall be granted, and plaintiffs' motion shall be denied.

Background

Until 1997, the Mechanics Education Society of America (MESA) represented machine repairmen at Toledo Jeep plants. The MESA contract was separate from the contract governing other skilled trade employees-including electricians and millwrights. The Local 12, represented these other workers.

Likewise until 1997, the MESA collective bargaining agreement established a Dispute Resolution Committee. This committee, which consisted of two representatives each from management, MESA, and UAW, was to resolve disagreements as to work assignments between trades.

In 1997, the MESA collective bargaining agreement expired. Local 12 became the sole representative of skilled trades employees, including those formerly represented by MESA.

Local 12 signed a new collective bargaining agreement with Daimler Chrysler. Article VI of that agreement, addressing “Toledo Assembly Plant-Operational Understandings,” provided, in part:

Paragraph 1-Joint Objectives and Goals

* * * * * *

(78) The Company and the Union enter into this agreement with the joint realization that maximum utilization of human resources potential is vitally important to the objectives of the Company, the Union and individual employees. A critical element of human resources development is the adoption of a participative style of operation. The participative style acknowledges the important contribution that can be made by soliciting input from employees regarding matters which directly affect them in their work environment ... The Company and Union recognize that a cooperative and participative work environment is essential to the success of the Chrysler Operating System, the organization, and the individual employee.

* * * * * *

Paragraph 3-Union Responsibilities

* * * * * *

(81) Based on the Company's long term commitment to the Toledo Assembly workforce, the Union commits its long term cooperation in recognizing the principle that the flexibility of the Company must be maintained in order to improve quality, and efficiency while implementing work practices that enhance an overall flexible production system. This flexibility includes, among other things, a minimal number of job classifications, flexibility in job assignments and job transfers, acceptance and promotion of extensive training and retraining, acceptance and promotion of increased responsibility and accountability of individual employees and teams of employees.

[Doc. 183-1, at 12-13].

With regard to skilled trades, the agreement provides:

Paragraph 7-Reduced Classifications

* * * * * *

(93) Skilled Trades classification shall be effectively reduced to reflect the consolidation of former M.E.S.A. classifications with UAW, Local 12 in addition to minimizing traditional lines of demarcation with respect to job responsibilities. Furthermore, the focus of multiple job responsibilities within Skilled Trades classifications will be directed to support production activity. Skilled Trades classifications may be limited to ten (10) classifications.

[Doc. 183-1, at 16].

The agreement also defines “flexible work practices” and discusses dispute resolution:

Paragraph 8-Flexible Work Practices

* * * * * *

(95) In order to clarify what constitutes flexible work practices, the parties recognize that many tasks are properly performed within the scope of two or more classifications. During the course of completing a principle assignment, employees may properly perform complementary and incidental tasks or series of such tasks that if performed separately may be regularly assigned to a particular classification under the following circumstances:

(96) The time required in relation to the principal job is relatively short. The employee has the capability to perform tasks. The work can be performed safely.

(97) The parties agree to discuss and objectively assess flexible work practices in an effort to maximize operational efficiency relative to expanding employee basic responsibilities inclusive of incidental non-skilled work and non-production support traditionally performed by Skilled Trades. Skilled Trades job responsibilities will be focused but not limited to supporting production activity.

(98) Disputes arising from the above understanding may be referred to the Chairman of the Shop Committee and Union Relations Supervisor to expeditious resolution.

(99) The parties shall attempt to resolve disputes outside the grievance procedure. Unresolved matters may, after joint good-faith efforts have failed, be ultimately referred to the grievance procedure for resolution.

[Doc. 183-1, at 17].

The new agreement between Local 12 and Daimler Chrysler did not contain a Dispute Resolution Committee as had the prior MESA and UAW agreements.

When Daimler Chrysler decided to build its new Toledo North Jeep plant, problems arose as to which trade should do what work. Machine repairmen, formerly represented by MESA, believed that work that they should do was being done by members of other trades (principally millwrights) which Local 12 historically had represented.

In response, the UAW, in consultation with Daimler Chrysler, formed a Lines of Demarcation Committee in early 2001.¹

The committee included one voting representative from each of eight trades. The other trades with representatives, in addition to the machine repairmen, were millwrights, electricians, machinists, tool and die, tool/layout inspector, powerhouse engineer and powerhouse mechanic. The committee held meetings, viewed equipment, discussed lines of demarcation regarding the equipment, and voted on the lines of demarcation for the new plant.

The powerhouse engineer and powerhouse mechanic only worked in the powerhouse and had no work at the new Toledo Jeep plant. Whenever there was a dispute over whether machine repairmen or millwrights should receive particular work, the powerhouse representatives on the committee always voted with the millwrights.

The committee issued twelve lines of demarcation decisions between June, 2001, and May, 2002. The May 31, 2002, decision was a clarification of a November 20, 2001, decision. These decisions transferred a large amount of work previously done by machine repairmen to millwrights and electricians. The committee made recommendations about lines of demarcation to Daimler Chrysler, which always adopted the committee's recommendations.

In August, 2001, discontinuance of a product line and volume reduction at the old Toledo Jeep plant resulted in the layoff of 1,772 employees. The layoff affected a larger percentage of machine repairmen than other skilled workers.

Some skilled trades employees, unhappy with the committee's demarcations, signed a petition asking the International to review work assignments in the new plant. Between 2000 and 2003 Jerry Brown, a International staff representative, visited Toledo three times. Part of Brown's job for the International was to help resolve disputes about work assignments.

Two of Brown's visits related to lines of demarcation. During both visits, Brown only looked at things UAW representatives told him were in dispute.

Disputes about work assignments continued through the 2003 contract negotiations. A letter dated November, 2003, from Thomas Maxon, a Senior Manager with Daimler Chrysler to Nick Vuich, Chairman of the Local 12 Jeep unit entitled “Resolution of Jurisdictional Work Assignment Disputes,” stated:

This is to confirm the Company's commitment to the assignment of work in a manner consistent with these mutually agreed upon jurisdictional determinations. If the Union believes the work was assigned in a manner inconsistent with such determinations, the Union should bring the issue to the attention of the Labor Relations Supervisor for immediate resolution.

If the matter cannot be satisfactorily resolved by the local parties, the matter may be referred to the UAW Regional Representative and Corporate Union Relations for resolution.

[Doc. 183-1, at 18].

Sometime after these negotiations, Fritz Edwards became the Skilled Trades Committeeman and Dan Henneman succeeded Vuich as Jeep Unit Chairman. Henneman assigned Edwards to establish the jurisdictional determinations.

Edwards called a meeting with the skilled trades stewards. Then-machine trades steward, Gale Davis, did not attend the meeting because it was at 3:00 a.m. Later, after Richard McIntyre succeeded Davis as machine trades steward, Edwards called another meeting of skilled trades stewards to discuss lines of demarcation. McIntyre attended, but got upset and left halfway through the meeting.

Henneman later emailed the stewards informing them of another meeting and stating that everyone had to stay until issues were resolved. McIntyre emailed back that no one would keep him against his will. He later testified that his grandson's...