William Scott Zastrow v. City of Wyoming
331791
| Mich. Ct. App. | Sep 5, 2017Background
- Zastrow, a 16‑year city employee with an unblemished record, was terminated after handling a loaded rifle left in a police car brought to the municipal garage for repairs.
- Another employee (Colvin) discovered and initially held the rifle; Zastrow made it safe and directed it be secured in a locker.
- City fired Zastrow citing two rules: (1) theft/dishonesty (withholding information) and (2) abusive/intimidating/threatening conduct; the termination letter did not explain why lesser discipline was inadequate.
- Zastrow asked the union (Administrative and Supervisory Employees Association) to file a grievance; the union refused to pursue arbitration and did not file a formal grievance.
- Zastrow sued the union for breach of the duty of fair representation; the trial court granted summary disposition for the union (affirmed by the majority), but Judge Shapiro dissented in part, concluding there was ample evidence to send the union claim to trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether union breached duty of fair representation by refusing to file grievance | Zastrow: union acted arbitrarily and in bad faith by refusing to grieve despite strong merits and failing to state a legitimate basis for refusal | Union: discretionary decision not to pursue arbitration; concerns about precedent and low likelihood of success | Dissent: factual disputes exist about union’s motives and investigation; evidence supports claim that refusal was arbitrary and lacked good faith—case should proceed to trial (would reverse summary disposition) |
| Whether union’s reasons (avoid precedent/overburden) justify denial of representation | Zastrow: reasons are conclusory and unsupported; union has never taken a case to arbitration, suggesting a blanket policy | Union: feared creating precedent and being overwhelmed by arbitrations | Dissent: union failed to explain how pursuing this grievance would compel frivolous future arbitrations; blanket refusal suggests arbitrary conduct |
| Whether union reasonably assessed likelihood of success at arbitration | Zastrow: record shows weak employer evidence and strong defenses (no threat, acted to secure gun), so arbitration success was likely | Union: concluded likelihood of prevailing was low after investigation | Dissent: union appears to have adopted employer’s view and prematurely decided; a reasonable advocate could likely obtain reversal or reduced discipline at arbitration |
| Whether employer had just cause for termination (relevance to union duty) | Zastrow: conduct did not amount to threatening or dishonest behavior; mitigating facts (not responsible for gun, made it safe, bereavement) support lesser sanction | City: Zastrow made a remark and failed to be fully truthful during investigation, justifying termination under rules | Dissent: employer’s proof was thin and disputed; an arbitrator could find no good cause for termination or only a lesser sanction |
Key Cases Cited
- Lowe v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees Union, 389 Mich 123 (Mich. 1973) (union duty of fair representation; union discretion to abandon frivolous grievances but fiduciary-like relationship)
- Goolsby v. Detroit, 419 Mich 651 (Mich. 1984) (articulates three‑part fair‑representation test: no hostility/discrimination; good faith; avoid arbitrary conduct)
- Vaca v. Sipes, 386 US 171 (U.S. 1967) (source of federal standard for union duty of fair representation)