« Three useful cases | Main | Terminable arbitration agreement was enforceable »

Union had standing to represent retirees in arbitration
March 14, 2006 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

The message: If both the union and company submit to the arbitrator the issue of whether the union has standing to represent the interests of retirees, then the arbitrator's decision on that question will be upheld.

Cleveland Electric v. Utility Workers Union (6th Cir 03/14/2006)

The union filed a grievance, on behalf of its members and retirees, relating to the company's change in health care provisions and providers. The company's position was that the grievance was not arbitrable as to the retirees, and that question was submitted to the arbitrator.

The arbitrator ruled that the union had standing to seek arbitration on behalf of the retirees, and that the retiree's consent was not necessary.

When the company sued to vacate the arbitrator's award, the trial court held that the union had standing to represent the retirees, but that the retirees' consent was necessary.

The 6th Circuit affirmed.

1. The issue of arbitrability was submitted by both parties to the arbitrator, and his decision drew its essence from the collective bargaining agreement.
2. It was necessary for the retirees to consent to union representation because they had statutory rights to the benefits which they could pursue against the company, and those could be lost in arbitration.

I didn't see any mention of whether the union had standing to represent the retirees in the court action, which was brought under Section 301. See Machinists v. Goodrich (5th Cir 05/18/2005), in which a union sued under Section 301 to compel the employer to arbitrate an issue involving retiree benefits. The court held that the union had standing in court because the retirees had signed consent forms. That's the only case I ever heard of in which a union could sue under Section 301 on behalf of non-employees simply because the non-employees consented.

	Web www.LawMemo.com  This form will search the LawMemo web site. It does not include the Caselaw Database.