Unite Here Local 217 v. SAGE HOSPITALITY RESOURCES
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8884
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- Neutrality agreement signed 6/9/2003 to facilitate union organizing; union would refrain from picketing in exchange for card-check recognition procedures.
- Duration clause provided that the agreement remained in effect until thirty months after full public opening or upon employer recognition of the union; no definition for full public opening.
- Dispute arose 1/5/2010 when union sought recognition; hotel contended full public opening occurred 6/1/2007 and that term expired 12/1/2009, ending obligations.
- Union argued the meaning of full public opening was arbitrator-bound and tied to the contract’s interpretation; hotel urged court determination of arbitrability.
- District court held that the dispute fell within the scope of the broad arbitration clause and ordered arbitration; hotel sought review arguing Howsam requires court determination of arbitrability.
- Court of appeals treats threshold arbitrability question as to be decided by arbitrator unless the parties clearly contemplated court resolution and affirms arbitration order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the dispute over duration is arbitrable under the arbitration clause | Union: dispute concerns interpretation of agreement; arbitrator to decide | Hotel: duration issue is arbitrability, should be decided by court under Howsam | Arbitrator (not court) to decide; dispute falls within broad arbitration clause |
| Whether Howsam governs whether the gateway issue is for court or arbitrator | Union: Howsam allows arbitrator to decide contract-interpretation issues | Hotel: Howsam restricts arbitrability questions to court | Howsam does not preclude arbitrator resolution of contract-interpretation disputes under a broad clause; no overrule of earlier precedents; arbitrator to decide |
Key Cases Cited
- International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1228 v. Freedom WLNE-TV, Inc., 760 F.2d 8 (1st Cir.1985) (broad arbitration clause contemplates contract interpretation disputes)
- Municipality of San Juan v. Corporación Para El Fomento Económico De La Ciudad Capital, 415 F.3d 145 (1st Cir.2005) (durational dispute must be decided by arbitrator under broad clause)
- Green Tree Fin. Corp. v. Bazzle, 539 U.S. 444 (2003) (arbitration clause breadth implies arbitrator decides meaning of contract)
- First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938 (1995) (interpretation of contract arbitration clause standard—court cannot decide unless parties so provide)
- AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Communications Workers of America, 475 U.S. 643 (1986) (contract interpretation versus arbitrability framework)
- Granite Rock Co. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 130 S. Ct. 2847 (2010) (arbitrability depends on whether parties consent to arbitrate the dispute; breadth of clause matters)
- Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79 (2002) (gateway questions of arbitrability presumptively for court; narrow set of exceptions)
- New England Cleaning Services, Inc. v. Services Employees International Union, Local 254, 199 F.3d 537 (1st Cir.1999) (arbitrability principles applied to disputes under unions contracts)