Carrie Zepperi-Lomanto v. American Postal Workers Union
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8424
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Lomanto worked as a USPS custodian in Palatine, Illinois, under a bid job with a seniority-based schedule governed by a union- Postal Service collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
- She later served as a temporary maintenance supervisor for periods four months or less, after which the bid job was reopened for another member.
- In Dec 2008, union steward LaFoe warned Lomanto she violated the four-month rule for not returning to custodial duties for a full pay period after a supervisory assignment.
- Lomanto reported another employee for falsifying timesheets; LaFoe later filed a grievance against Lomanto alleging sick-leave falsification.
- Management concluded Lomanto violated the four-month rule, stripped her bid job, and gave it to Patricia Scott; Lomanto remained a temporary supervisor.
- Lomanto sued the union for breach of the duty of fair representation under LMRA § 301, seeking reinstatement, damages, and attorneys’ fees; the district court granted summary judgment for the union.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the union breach its duty of fair representation? | Lomanto contends the union retaliated and failed to fairly represent her. | Union acted in good faith; the grievance outcome did not warrant reinstatement or damages. | No, court affirmed—no relief available to Lomanto against the union. |
| Is reinstatement to a bid job available against the union? | Union could influence Postal Service to reinstate her bid job. | Reinstatement cannot be ordered against a non-party employer; relief against the union is unavailable. | Affirmed; reinstatement relief against the union is not available. |
| Are punitive damages recoverable in a fair-representation suit? | Foust allows punitive damages in retaliatory conduct; case is distinguishable. | Foust establishes blanket prohibition on punitive damages in fair-representation suits. | Affirmed; punitive damages are not recoverable. |
| Are emotional-distress damages recoverable in a LMRA fair-representation suit? | Emotional distress may be recoverable in exceptional cases. | Emotional distress claims are preempted by LMRA; Lomanto's allegations do not show outrageous conduct. | Affirmed; emotional-distress damages not available. |
| Are attorney's fees recoverable in a union-fair-representation suit? | Attorneys’ fees should be recoverable for pursuing the claim against the employer/union. | American rule applies; Bennett limits fees to claims against the employer, not the union. | Affirmed; Lomanto cannot recover attorneys’ fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Baldini v. Local Union No. 1095, 581 F.2d 145 (7th Cir. 1978) (relief against the union in a civil action cannot produce reinstatement)
- International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Foust, 442 U.S. 42 (Supreme Court 1979) (punitive damages not available in union-employee fair-representation suits)
- Lewis v. Local Union No. 100 of Laborers’ Int’l Union, 750 F.2d 1368 (7th Cir. 1984) (blanket prohibition against punitive damages in fair-representation suits)
- Baskin v. Hawley, 807 F.2d 1120 (2d Cir. 1986) (emotional-distress damages in exceptional union conduct cases)
- Richardson v. Comm. Workers of Am., 443 F.2d 974 (8th Cir. 1971) (emotional distress considerations in fair-representation claims)
- In re Amoco Petrol. Additives Co., 964 F.2d 706 (7th Cir. 1992) (preemption of state-law claims in LMRA disputes)
- Chapple v. Nat’l Starch & Chem. Co., 178 F.3d 501 (7th Cir. 1999) (LMRA preemption considerations in CBA disputes)
- Bennett v. Local Union No. 66, 958 F.2d 1429 (7th Cir. 1992) (recovery of expenses vs. attorney’s fees against the union; American rule)
- Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., 560 U.S. 242 (Supreme Court 2010) (American rule; prevailing party fees generally not awarded)