Abuse of Discretion – Jurisdiction

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Brock Industrial Services, LLC, v. Laborers’ International Union of North America Construction, et al.

Case No.: 17-2597; 17-2688

Officials: BAUER, SYKES, and BARRETT, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Abuse of Discretion – Jurisdiction

Brock Industrial Services, LLC, is an Illinois-based provider of industrial services, including scaffolding, painting, insulation, and shoring. In January 2016 it entered into a labor agreement with Local 100 of the Laborers’ International Union (“the Laborers Union” or “the Laborers”). The agreement requires arbitration of grievances and establishes a bipartite arbitration procedure for resolving most disputes. But work-jurisdiction disputes—disputes over whether the Laborers or another union is entitled to perform work—are instead subject to a tripartite arbitration procedure involving the company and the contending unions.

Brock filed suit under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, seeking to vacate the Subcommittee’s decision. The Laborers Union responded with a request to enforce the decision. After a flurry of motions on both sides, the district judge determined that the Subcommittee had authority to resolve the dispute and issued an order enforcing its decision. Brock appealed. Under the mistaken impression that the judge had denied the motion to enforce, the Laborers Union also appealed.

We reverse. At bottom, this grievance concerns which of two unions was entitled to perform the scaffolding work at the chemical plant. That’s a jurisdictional dispute, and the labor agreement calls for tripartite arbitration of jurisdictional disputes. Accordingly, the Subcommittee had no authority over the matter and its decision must be vacated.

Reversed

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.