First Student, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 959

• Decision Date: 26 September 2019
• Docket Number: Case No. 3:18-cv-00305-SLG
• Parties: FIRST STUDENT, INC., Petitioner, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, LOCAL 959, Respondent.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Alaska

FIRST STUDENT, INC., Petitioner, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, LOCAL 959, Respondent.

Case No. 3:18-cv-00305-SLG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

September 26, 2019

ORDER RE MOTION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD AND CROSS-MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION TO VACATE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD

Before the Court are Petitioner First Student, Inc.'s ("First Student") Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award at Docket 3 and Respondent International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 959's ("Teamsters") Cross-Motion to Dismiss Petition to Vacate Arbitrator's Award at Docket 14. Both motions have been fully briefed.¹ Oral argument was not requested and was not necessary to the Court's determination.

BACKGROUND

This action arises from an arbitrator's Decision and Award rendered on September 28, 2018. Arbitrator Elizabeth Ford presided over a dispute betweenTeamsters and First Student concerning First Student's treatment of bus driver John Kuklis after he was removed from his route at the request of the school district he served. Arbitrator Ford ruled for Teamsters on behalf of Mr. Kuklis.² On December 26, 2018, First Student filed this action to vacate the arbitration award.³ On February 20, 2019, Teamsters moved to dismiss the petition to vacate and requested an order enforcing the arbitration award.⁴

FACTS

First Student and Teamsters are parties to a collective bargaining agreement that governs the terms and conditions of employment for bus drivers servicing schools on the Kenai Peninsula.⁵ The parties are bound by two labor agreements: (1) the National Master First Student Agreement ("NationalAgreement")⁶ and (2) the School Bus Drivers, Attendants, and Monitors Agreement ("Local Agreement")⁷.

The National Agreement is the main agreement between the parties. It covers "operations in, between and over all of the states, territories and possessions of the United States."⁸ By its own terms, the Local Agreement "is supplemental to the Teamsters-First Student National Master Agreement."⁹ Pursuant to both agreements, employees are guaranteed the superior conditions offered in either agreement. The National Agreement states that "[i]t is the intent of the parties that generally negotiated terms and conditions of employment will be set forth in the National Agreement and that any locally negotiated conditions generally will be narrowly limited in scope to locally negotiated economic provisions and local terms and conditions of employment."¹⁰ It adds that "any lesser conditions contained in any Supplement, Rider or Addendum hereto shall be superseded by the conditions contained in this National Agreement. However,nothing in this National Agreement shall deprive any employee of any superior benefit or term contained in their Supplement, Rider or Addendum."¹¹ Similarly, the Local Agreement specifies that "any lesser conditions contained in this supplement shall be superseded by the conditions contained in the National Master Agreement" but adds that "nothing in the National Master Agreement shall deprive any employee of any superior benefit or term contained in this supplement."¹²

I. Employee Removal and Grievance Policies

Relevant to the parties' dispute here, both agreements contain provisions governing employee removal and grievances. Specifically, both contemplate the situation at hand wherein a bus driver was removed from his route at the school district's request.

The National Agreement details the procedure for employee removal in Article 11:

If the Company is required to remove a driver from a route at the School District's request, the Company agrees to discuss the matter with the School District as soon as practical to attempt to adjust or resolve the issue and will seek permission of the client to invite the Union to participate in such discussions. If the School District maintains its position on the removal of the driver, the Company will meet with the Union to discuss the status of the driver. The Union will be given a copy of the directive requiring the removal of the driver where appropriate. If the directive is not in writing, the Company willrequest the School District provide a written directive setting forth the reason for the removal. The Company will make every effort to place the employee in substantially equivalent work within the bargaining unit serviced by this Local Union or at another of the company's locations for which the driver is qualified, either of which should be in the geographic area of the Local Union or in another mutually agreeable location."¹³

The Local Agreement also addresses employee removal at the request of a school district. Article 14, Section 14.01 lists "a notice to remove an employee from performing service in accordance with the District's revenue contract" as a serious infraction in which case the employee "may be utilized for other work outside of the revenue agreement or any work under the revenue contract to the extent allowed by the District's restrictions, if there is work available and the employee is qualified for such work."¹⁴

Both agreements also provide a process for grievances culminating in arbitration. In the National Agreement, Article 42 establishes a joint national grievance review committee ("JNGRC") made up of an equal number of representatives from each party to "consider and resolve disputes of national or regional significance" and to "review such disputes prior to the submission of the matter to the final authority for resolution (whether an arbitrator or a panel) set forthin the local agreement out of which the dispute arises or this National Agreement."¹⁵

The JNGRC functions "with the same authority as a neutral arbitrator or mediator" and has the authority "to issue final and binding decisions."¹⁶ The National Agreement provides that "[u]nresolved disputes arising from the National Agreement shall be submitted to final and binding arbitration upon written notice from either party."¹⁷ In the event of a deadlock wherein the "provisions of the National Master, FO or other company policies, are central to the dispute (Articles 1 through 49) such dispute shall be submitted to a mutually agreeable neutral arbitrator for final and binding resolution."¹⁸ Article 42 of the National Agreement adds that "[t]he dispute resolution machinery contained in local riders, addenda or supplements do not have authority to interpret the provisions of the National Master (Articles 1 through 49) without the consent of the Employer and the National Union Committee."¹⁹

The Local Agreement's grievance procedure is detailed in Article 14. Section 14.02 defines a grievance as "disputes or differences between theCompany and the Union . . . with respect to interpretation or application of any specific provision of this Agreement."²⁰ In the event of a grievance, the Local Agreement provides a detailed procedure if informal resolution fails.²¹ The third and final step in the process is arbitration. The "parties agree that the decision or award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on each of the parties and that they will abide thereby, subject to such laws, rules, and regulations as may be applicable."²²

Per the terms of the Local Agreement, the "arbitrator shall render a written decision and award within thirty (30) days from the close of the hearing or the submission of briefs."²³ And the authority of the arbitrator "shall be limited to determining questions directly involving the interpretation of applications of the specific provisions of this Agreement, and no other matter shall be subject to arbitration there under [sic]."²⁴ The Local Agreement limits the arbitrator's powers, providing that she "shall have no authority to add to, subtract from or to changeany of the terms of this Agreement . . . [or] to base any decision on any practice or custom which is inconsistent with any provision of this Agreement."²⁵

II. The Proceedings Between the Parties

The parties' dispute arises from an arbitration decision and award rendered by Arbitrator Elizabeth Ford on September 26, 2018.²⁶ The arbitration concerned First Student's treatment of its employee, John Kuklis. In response to a complaint from a school district, First Student removed Mr. Kuklis from his bus route on March 24, 2017.²⁷ He remained on the payroll for several weeks and attended safety meetings but did not perform any additional work.²⁸ On May 8, 2017, Mr. Kuklis was terminated by First Student as a result of an incident involving another employee.²⁹

As summarized in the Arbitrator's decision and award, Teamsters initiated a grievance on Mr. Kuklis's behalf, alleging a violation of the National Agreement.³⁰ Specifically, Teamsters alleged that "First Student, Inc. [h]as not made an effort to provide work to Mr. Kuklis as described under Article 11 of the National MasterFirst Student Agreement" and grieved "under any other articles/sections that may apply of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between First Student, Inc. - Kenai, and the Teamsters Local 959 and any other articles/section that may apply of the First [S]tudent National Master Agreement."³¹

First Student denied the grievance. The parties met to try to resolve their dispute, but Teamsters ultimately submitted a request to the JNGRC "seeking review of this issue prior to arbitration."³² On November 7, 2017, the JNGRC issued a decision concluding that "the dispute is hereby remanded to the parties for resolution under their local dispute resolution procedures. The parties may rely on the language of both their local agreements as well as the National Agreement."³³ The parties agreed to arbitration of the issue and a hearing was held before Arbitrator Elizabeth Ford on June 20, 2018.³⁴

The arbitrator framed the issue as a question: "Did First Student violate the National Agreement and/or the Local Agreement in its response to the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District's March 24 requirement that Mr. Kuklis be removed from District...