International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. National Labor Relations Board
844 F.3d 590
6th Cir.2016Background
- Aretha Powell, a Caravan Knight janitor represented by UAW Local 1700, was terminated after threatening a coworker; Local 1700 steward Margaret Faircloth submitted a witness statement about the incident and later filed a Step 1 grievance on Powell’s behalf.
- Powell learned of Faircloth’s statement only after filing charges with the NLRB; Local 1700 processed the grievance (Step 1 by Faircloth, Step 2 by Davis) and settled for reinstatement without back pay and other conditions; Powell rejected the offer.
- Powell filed charges alleging the Union breached its duty of fair representation by (1) Faircloth submitting an adverse statement and (2) Faircloth representing Powell without disclosing that statement.
- An ALJ dismissed the consolidated complaint against Caravan Knight and the Union; the NLRB reversed as to Local 1700, finding a duty-breach based on three cumulative facts: (i) Faircloth’s statement was partly false, (ii) Faircloth represented Powell at Step 1 without disclosure, and (iii) Powell was unaware of the statement throughout grievance processing.
- The Sixth Circuit reviewed the Board’s factual findings under the substantial-evidence standard, concluded the record did not support the Board’s finding that Faircloth’s statement was partly false, and vacated the Board’s finding that Local 1700 breached its duty of fair representation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the Board have substantial evidence that Faircloth’s witness statement was partly false (i.e., that she did not witness the threatening incident)? | ALJ and Board: Faircloth did not witness the threat; her statement was partly false. | Union: Record does not support discrediting testimony showing Faircloth could have been present; Hudson’s testimony is ambiguous. | Reversed — Board lacked substantial evidence to find Faircloth’s statement partly false. |
| Did Faircloth “represent” Powell at Step 1 of the grievance process? | Board: Yes; preparing/submitting the Step 1 grievance constituted representation. | Union: Faircloth’s Step 1 actions were ministerial and not substantive representation. | Affirmed — substantial evidence supports that Faircloth represented Powell at Step 1. |
| Was Powell unaware during the grievance process that Faircloth had submitted a statement against her? | Board: Powell did not learn of Faircloth’s statement until after charges; non-disclosure is proved. | Union: Powell learned of the statement within days and the non-disclosure was immaterial. | Affirmed — substantial evidence supports Powell’s unawareness during grievance processing. |
| Did Local 1700 breach its duty of fair representation (arbitrary or in bad faith) based on the non-disclosure and representation? | Board: Cumulative facts (false statement, representation without disclosure, Powell’s unawareness) showed arbitrary or bad-faith conduct warranting liability. | Union: Facts do not show extreme arbitrariness or bad faith; rationale existed for non-disclosure and Step 1 representation; mere negligence is insufficient. | Reversed — the record does not show arbitrary or bad-faith conduct; vacated the Board’s duty-breach finding. |
Key Cases Cited
- NLRB v. Galicks, Inc., 671 F.3d 602 (6th Cir.) (standard of appellate review: substantial evidence)
- Int'l Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Workers of Am. v. NLRB, 514 F.3d 574 (6th Cir.) (substantial-evidence review and deference to Board credibility determinations)
- Holly Farms Corp. v. NLRB, 517 U.S. 392 (1996) (deference to agency applying law to varying fact patterns)
- Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171 (1967) (union duty of fair representation standard: arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith)
- DelCostello v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 (1983) (context for union duty of fair representation)
- Merritt v. Int’l Ass’n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, 613 F.3d 609 (6th Cir.) (bad-faith standard for union conduct)
- Driver v. U.S. Postal Serv., 328 F.3d 863 (6th Cir.) (union must undertake reasonable investigation to defend member)
- Garrison v. Cassens Transp. Co., 334 F.3d 528 (6th Cir.) (extreme-arbitrariness standard; union agents not held to lawyer standard)