Samosky v. United Parcel Serv.

• Decision Date: 06 May 2013
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 1:10–01081.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia
• Parties: Robert SAMOSKY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, et al., Defendants.

944 F.Supp.2d 479

Robert SAMOSKY, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 1:10–01081.

United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia.

May 6, 2013.

Anthony R. Veneri, Randall L. Veneri, Veneri Law Offices, Princeton, WV, for Plaintiffs.

Joshua Verdi, William Bevan, David J. McAllister, Reed Smith, Pittsburgh, PA, Michael J. Del Giudice, Ciccarello Del Giudice & LaFon, Charleston, WV, Gary S. Witlen, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Washington, DC, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DAVID A. FABER, Senior District Judge.

By Judgment Order entered on March 29, 2013, the court GRANTED the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers Local Union No. 175 (“Local Union No. 175” or “Local 175”), GRANTED the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL–CIO (“IBT” or “International Union”), and GRANTED the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants United Parcel Service, Sharpe, and Schau (collectively “the UPS defendants”). (Doc. # 97). The reasons for that decision follow.

I. Background

Plaintiffs are current and former drivers for the United Parcel Service (“UPS”), based out of its Business Center in Bluefield, West Virginia. The Bluefield Business Center is part of the Mid Atlantic District and is responsible for the processing of packages and their pickup and delivery to customers within the geographic area serviced by the Center. From 2009 until May 2011, Paul Schau was the Business Manager of the Bluefield Center. See Deposition of Paul Schau, May 30, 2012, at 9–10, 60 (hereinafter “Schau Depo. at ____”). Schau was also, at the time, the Manager of the Business Center in Beckley, West Virginia. See id. at 9, 60. In May 2011, while retaining the Beckley Center, he was reassigned from the BluefieldCenter and picked up management of the Business Center in Lewisburg, West Virginia. See id. at 10. Also working at the Bluefield Center was Michael Sharpe, who worked as a supervisor at the Bluefield Center until June 14, 2011, when he was reassigned to the Beckley Center. See Deposition of Michael D. Sharpe II, May 25, 2012, at 12, 69 (hereinafter “Sharpe Dep. at ____”), Schau Depo. at 10; Deposition of James Austin, Oct. 27, 2011, at 102 (“Austin Depo. Vol. I, at ____”).

Plaintiffs are among 35 bargaining unit employees represented by Local Union No. 175. See Declaration of Ken Hall, August 14, 2012, at ¶ 1 (hereinafter “Hall Decl. at ____”). The terms and conditions of plaintiffs' employment with UPS is governed by a collective bargaining agreement known as the National Master United Parcel Service Agreement (“Master Agreement”) and the Atlantic Area Supplement (collectively “CBA” or “Labor Agreement”). See Hall Decl. at ¶ 3; Joint Exhibit 1. Plaintiffs have acknowledged their understanding that the CBA governs the terms and conditions of their employment with UPS. See Deposition of Robert Samosky, October 11, 2011, at 17–18 (hereinafter “Samosky Depo., at ____”); Deposition of Greg Neely, August 16, 2011, at 9–10 (hereinafter “Neely Depo. (Vol. I), at ––––”); Deposition of Tony Booth, October 14, 2011, at 64 (hereinafter “Booth Depo. (Vol. I), at ____”); Austin Depo. (Vol. I), at 89.

Local unions, including Local Union No. 175, generally designate Shop Stewards to assist with their representation of the bargaining unit employees. See Deposition of Johnny Sawyer, May 11, 2012, at 26 (hereinafter “Sawyer Depo. (Vol. I), at ____”). At the Bluefield Center, Plaintiff Austin was the Shop Steward. See id. at 188. He reported to Johnny Sawyer, who was the Local 175 Business Agent. See id. at 14, 19–20. Sawyer, in turn, reported to Ken Hall, who is the President of Local 175 as well as an officer of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, serving as head of its Package Division. See id. at 17; Hall Decl. at ¶¶ 1, 2, and 12.

Article 49 of the CBA provides as follows regarding the filing of employee grievances:

A grievance is hereby jointly defined to be any controversy, complaint, misunderstanding or dispute arising as to interpretation, application or observance of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

Grievance procedures may be invoked only by authorized Union representatives. In the event of a grievance, it shall be handled in the following manner:

(a) The employee shall report it to his shop steward in writing within five (5) working days. The steward shall attempt to adjust the matter with the supervisor within forty-eight (48) hours. Management will sign and date each grievance that is presented to them, provided this does not interrupt the operations, regardless of the merits of said grievance. The purpose of the signature is only to verify that the grievance was actually received.

(b) Failing to agree, the shop steward shall promptly report the matter to the Union which shall submit it in writing and attempt to adjust the same with the Employer within five (5) days.

(c) If the parties fail to reach a decision or agree upon a settlement in the matter, it shall be submitted in writing within ten (10) working days unless otherwise mutually agreed to the Atlantic Area Parcel Grievance Committee.

Joint Exhibit 1, at p. 187.

Regarding Local 175's actual practices with respect to the processing of grievances, Ken Hall testified:

9. From my experience as a Local 175 agent who spent years processing local grievances, and based upon my familiarity with the manner in which grievances are processed by other local unions under the Atlantic Area Supplement, I can attest to the fact that the parties habitually and by mutual consent waive the five (5) day resolution period for grievances that do not involve discharges, suspensions or other situations in which employees are not being deprived of the opportunity to work. This accommodation recognizes the significant number of grievances that are filed in some UPS facilities, the vast number of UPS locations that are serviced by a single union agent or company manager, variables including distances and weather, and the other demands on the time of the union and company agents responsible for resolving industrial disputes. The practice in most local unions with which I am familiar is that meetings to process grievances that do not involve discharges or suspensions at the second step are scheduled periodically, when a number of grievances have accumulated. This permits both management and union officials to work through multiple grievances efficiently.

10. Despite this common practice, the contract contains a short timeframe for addressing grievances to compel resolution of such claims where an employee is taken out of work for some alleged violation or where an employee is accused of having committed a serious breach that the company deems requires immediate discipline.

Hall Decl. at ¶¶ 9, 10.

The Complaint, insofar as it relates to the UPS defendants, alleges as follows:

7. On multiple occasions, Defendants, Paul Schau and Michael “Mike” Sharpe, have engaged in, promoted, condoned, or threatened work place harassment and physical violence against your Plaintiffs herein ...

Amended Complaint, ¶ 7. Specifically, plaintiffs allege that Sharpe committed battery on plaintiffs Austin and Booth and assaulted plaintiff Samosky. See id. at ¶ 7(a). Plaintiffs further contend that Sharpe “has harassed and threatened each of the Plaintiffs by screaming or yelling at them, utilizing improper language, and going to residences of sick employees and attempted, in a threatening way, to compel them to return to work.” Id. at ¶ 7(b). They also allege that Sharpe has intimidated and threatened employees for filing grievances and instructed employees “not to fill in blanks on certain forms so that the forms could be back dated.” Id. at ¶ 7(c).

As to Schau, the complaint alleges that Schau was aware of Sharpe's misconduct but refused to take corrective action. See id. at ¶ 7(d). According to the complaint, Schau not only acquiesced in Sharpe's misconduct, but he also made threats to employees who attempted to file grievances and had, at times for various reasons, threatened to discharge plaintiffs. See id. at ¶¶ 7(d) and (e). The complaint further alleges that UPS has done nothing to stop the misconduct of Sharpe and Schau. See id. at ¶¶ 8 and 9.

According to plaintiffs,

The intentional acts of Defendants UPS, Sharpe, and Shau, have substantially interfered with the rights and abilities of the Plaintiffs, the Defendant Local Union, the Defendant National Union, and/or others to pursue grievances and other means of dispute resolution provided in the [Labor Agreement]. Specifically, Defendants UPS, Sharpe, and Shau have engaged in threats, intimidation, and coercion: [1] by physically assaulting or battering one or more Plaintiffs or others, [2] by threatening to cause the Plaintiffs or others to lose their employment with Defendant UPS, and [3] by refusing to process and resolve grievances, and this conduct has caused the Plaintiffs, the Defendant Local Union, the Defendant National Union and/or others to not pursue filing grievances and other dispute resolution provided in the contracts referred to above. Defendants UPS, Sharpe, and Shau, have intentionally acted to defeat the express provisions in the contracts establishing how grievances, once filed, are to be timely and substantively resolved so that the Plaintiffs and others receive the due process afforded to them under the contracts and by law. Those Defendants refuse to comply with the procedures in the contracts for the filing and disposition of grievances.

Amended Complaint ¶ 11. As to the Union defendants, plaintiffs claim Local 175 has breached its duty of fair representation by failing to file grievances, failing to prosecute grievances once they are filed, and/or failing to process grievances in a timely manner. See id. at ¶¶ 16–22.

The specific allegations and facts as they...