Chi. Reg'l Council of Carpenters v. Resnick
| Decision Date | 19 February 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. 15 C 7614,15 C 7614 |
| Citation | 215 F.Supp.3d 698 |
| Parties | CHICAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS, Plaintiff, v. Richard M. RESNICK, as Administrator to the Plan for Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes in the Construction Industry, Defendant, and Prime Scaffold, Inc., Defendant/Counter–Plaintiff. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Terrance Bryan McGann, Gregory Nathan Freerksen, Karen M. Rioux, Nicholas Edward Kasmer, Whitfield McGann & Ketterman, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff.
Edward M. Hogan, Patrick Edward Deady, Hogan Marren Babbo & Rose, Ltd., Chicago, IL, Lucas Robert Jason Aubrey, Sherman, Dunn, Cohen, Leifer & Yellig, P.C., Washington, DC, for Defendant.
Robert E. Bloch, Ronald M. Willis, Dowd, Bloch, Bennett, Cervone, Auerbach & Yokich, Chicago, IL, for Defendant/Counter–Plaintiff.
This action arises out of a multi-party labor dispute over work performed on a construction project at the Zurich American Insurance Company Headquarters in Schaumburg, Illinois (the "Zurich Project"). On August 28, 2015, the Chicago Regional Counsel of Carpenters (the "Carpenters Union") sued defendants Richard Resnick, as Administrator to the Plan for Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes in the Construction Industry (the "National Plan") and Prime Scaffold, an employer in the construction industry and subcontractor on the Zurich Project, seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. In the now-operative Second Amended Complaint, the Carpenters Union seeks: 1) a declaration that it is not bound by any decision entered pursuant to the National Plan, and has no obligation to engage in the dispute resolution procedure set forth in the National Plan; 2) an order vacating an arbitration award entered in Prime's favor and against the Carpenters Union pursuant to the National Plan; and 3) damages for Prime's alleged breach of contract.
Prime asserts a two-count counterclaim against the Carpenters Union. First, Prime seeks to enjoin the Carpenters Union from taking coercive action or asserting damages against a the Anning–Johnson Company—a third party that subcontracted certain work on the Zurich Project to Prime—or from pursuing a change in work assignments on the Zurich Project through any means other than provided in the various contracts governing the project. Second, Prime seeks an order confirming the arbitration award that the Carpenters Union challenges.
Before me are two motions to dismiss. The first is by defendant Resnick, who argues that count I of the complaint should be dismissed on the grounds that: 1) I have no personal jurisdiction over the National Plan1 ; 2) subject matter jurisdiction is also lacking because plaintiff's claim against the National Plan is moot; and 3) the National Plan is not the real party in interest to this dispute. The second motion is by the Carpenters Union. It seeks dismissal of Prime's counterclaim for injunctive relief on the ground that the anti-injunction provisions of the Norris–LaGuardia Act, 29 U.S.C. § 113, divests me of jurisdiction to grant such relief. For the following reasons, I grant the first motion and deny the second.
To understand the claims and arguments that the parties raise, some background is essential. I take the following facts from the parties' respective pleadings, the exhibits attached thereto, and other evidence I may properly consider at this juncture.
The general contractor on the Zurich Project is a company called Clayco. Clayco subcontracted certain work on the project to Anning–Johnson, which further subcontracted the project's scaffolding work to Prime. Anning–Johnson is a signatory to a collective bargaining agreement with the Carpenters Union (the "Carpenters CBA"), while Prime is a signatory to a collective bargaining agreement with the General Laborers District Council of Chicago and Vicinity (the "Laborers Union") and is not a signatory to the Carpenters CBA. Prime thus assigned members of the Laborers Union to perform the scaffolding work on the Zurich Project.
The Carpenters Union and the Laborers Union are affiliates of the Chicago and Cook County Building and Construction Trades Council (the "Chicago Building Trades Council"), and as a result of this affiliation, they are bound by the Standard Agreement between the Chicago Building Trades Council and the Construction Employers' Association (the "Standard Agreement"). The Standard Agreement is also expressly incorporated into the Project Labor Agreement (the "PLA") that specifically governs the Zurich Project. All agree that the Carpenters Union and Prime are bound by the PLA.
The Standard Agreement establishes the Joint Conference Board (the "JCB") to facilitate the peaceful adjustment of jurisdictional disputes in the construction industry. Article VII of the Standard Agreement expressly acknowledges that it is an arbitration agreement. See Counterclaim ("CC") Exh. C, Art. VII. Article II specifies that all jurisdictional disputes must be arbitrated under the authority of the JCB, and it further states that "work will go on undisturbed" during the pendency of such arbitration. Id. at Art. II. Article VI similarly provides for final and binding arbitration of jurisdictional disputes before a JCB–selected arbitrator, subject to appeal under the National Plan, "if such an appeal is available under conditions determined by the Building and Construction Trades Department of the [AFL–CIO]." Id. at Art. VI.
The PLA also establishes a final and binding dispute resolution procedure for jurisdictional disputes that may arise in the course of the Zurich Project. This procedure culminates in the referral of unresolved disputes to the JCB as provided in the Standard Agreement. See Cmplt., Exh. A, ¶ 10. In addition, the PLA expressly prohibits any form of "self-help" to redress violations of the agreement, see id. , at ¶ 7, and it provides that no signatory shall instigate, support, or participate in any strike, work stoppage, or picketing of the jobsite for any reason. Id. at ¶ 4.
Prior to the events giving rise to this dispute, the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL–CIO (the "Building Trades Department") and various employer associations established the National Plan, which is a contract-based dispute resolution procedure for resolving jurisdictional disputes over work assignments in the organized construction industry. Its purpose is to resolve disputes without strikes or other impediments to the job progress. CC at ¶ 7. The National Plan provides that "local jurisdictional boards" recognized by the Building Trades Department, of which the JCB is one, "shall be used in the first instance to bring about an agreement, settlement or decision," subject to appeal under the National Plan. Cmplt., Exh. E (National Plan) at Art.VIII.
On August 14, 2015, the Carpenters Union sent a letter to Anning–Johnson claiming that Anning–Johnson's subcontract with Prime violated the Carpenters CBA. Cmplt. at ¶ 17 and Exh. C. Specifically, the Carpenters Union stated that because the Carpenters CBA required Anning–Johnson to subcontract all work performed on the Zurich Project to a signatory to that agreement, and because Prime was not a signatory to that agreement, Anning–Johnson was required to "maintain daily records of [Prime]'s jobsite hours and pay the appropriate wages and fringe benefit contributions," warning that "[f]ailure to do so will result in your liability not only for such contributions, but for any reasonable Attorney's fees incurred in collecting these monies as well as interest and liquidated damages." Id. The Carpenters Union closed its letter by stating, "you must understand that we will enforce compliance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement and will use every legal means to do so." Id.
Prime interpreted the Carpenters Union's letter to Anning–Johnson as an "Impediment to Job Progress" as defined in Article III of the Procedural Rules and Regulations of the National Plan. See Cmplt. , Exh. E (Procedural Rules) at Art. III.2 The National Plan prohibits impediments to job progress such as strikes, work stoppages, or picketing over jurisdictional disputes, and the Procedural Rules set forth procedures to be followed in the event of such an impediment. See Declaration of Richard Resnick ("Resnick Decl.") at ¶ 13; Cmplt., Exh. E (Procedural Rules) Arts. III, IV. Prime invoked these procedures on August 18, 2015, sending a "written notice of an impediment to job progress" to defendant Resnick in which it requested that the National Plan process the Carpenters Union's August 14, 2015, letter to Anning–Johnson as provided in Articles II and IV of the Procedural Rules. Cmplt., Exh. D. Prime's letter to Resnick asserted that all parties involved—the Laborers Union, the Carpenters Union, Prime, and Anning–Johnson—were stipulated to the National Plan.
On August 19, 2015, Resnick wrote to the Carpenters Union's national parent, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America ("UBC"), advising it of Prime's complaint of an impediment to job progress by the Carpenters Union, and requesting that UBC take "appropriate action to cause your local union to cease the alleged violation and to process any jurisdictional disputes that arise through the Chicago Joint Conference Board." Resnick Decl., Exh. 3. On the same day, the Carpenters Union wrote to Resnick, objecting to Prime's invocation of the National Plan. The Carpenters Union asserted that Anning–Johnson's subcontract with Prime violated the Carpenters CBA, and stated that its letter to Anning–Johnson was intended to notify Anning–Johnson of the violation and to enforce the CBA, claiming that it did not threaten to strike the project or to instigate a work stoppage.3 The Carpenters Union additionally denied that it was stipulated to the National Plan and asserted that pursuant to the PLA, any jurisdictional disputes in conjunction with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shamrock Fisheries, LLC v. Manning
... ... Chicago Reg'l Council of Carpenters v. Resnick , ... 215 F.Supp.3d 698, 706 ... ...