Becker v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 120
742 F.3d 330
8th Cir.2014Background
- US Foods closed its Eagan, MN facility in August 2008; the Union negotiated a tentative Facility Closure Agreement that would preserve seniority and pension rights but it required approval of two pension plans.
- The Minneapolis Food Distributing Industry Pension Plan trustees (three of whom were Union officials) rejected the tentative agreement on November 5, 2008; US Foods informed Eagan employees they could transfer only as new hires.
- On December 9, 2008, Becker and other displaced employees filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB against the Union; the NLRB dismissed the charge after investigation and Becker’s appeal was denied.
- The Union later pursued arbitration against US Foods under the collective bargaining agreement; the arbitrator issued an award denying the Union’s grievance on July 9, 2010.
- Plaintiffs filed suit in state court on December 30, 2010 against US Foods and the Union; the district court dismissed claims against US Foods and granted summary judgment to the Union, holding Becker’s duty-of-fair-representation claim accrued on December 9, 2008 and was time-barred under the six-month statute of limitations. Becker appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did Becker's hybrid §301 / duty-of-fair-representation claim accrue for 29 U.S.C. §160(b)'s six-month limitations period? | Accrual tolled during related arbitration; claim accrued on the arbitration award date (July 9, 2010), so the Dec. 30, 2010 suit was timely. | Accrual occurred when Becker knew or reasonably should have known of the Union’s alleged breach—by Dec. 9, 2008 when he filed the NLRB charge—so suit was untimely. | Court held claim accrued on Dec. 9, 2008; Becker’s suit was time-barred and summary judgment for the Union affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- DelCostello v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 (Sup. Ct. 1983) (section 10(b) six-month limitations period governs hybrid §301/fair-representation claims)
- Skyberg v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int’l Union, 5 F.3d 297 (8th Cir. 1993) (limitations period begins when employee knows or reasonably should know of union breach)
- Scott v. UAW Local 879, 242 F.3d 837 (8th Cir. 2001) (accrual when employee should reasonably have known of alleged breach)
- Childs v. Pa. Fed’n, Brotherhood of Maint. Way Emps., 831 F.2d 429 (3d Cir. 1987) (accrual may be delayed where union continues representation and attempts to remedy breach during related proceedings)
- Schuver v. MidAmerican Energy Co., 154 F.3d 795 (8th Cir. 1998) (reiterating accrual when employee knew or should have known of union breach)