Tommy Jones, Plaintiff-appellant, v. United Food & Commercial Workers International Union, Danmcdonald, Individually and in His Capacity As an Agent Ofunited Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 870, Afl-cio;safeway Stores, Inc., Defendants-appellees, 40 F.3d 1246 (9th Cir. 1994)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Tommy Jones appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 870 ("the Union")¹  in Jones' action alleging that the Union violated its duty of fair representation in violation of the National Labor Relations Act, ("NLRA"), 29 U.S.C. § 185. The district court held that Jones' action was barred by the six-month statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Cook v. Lindsay Olive Growers, 911 F.2d 233, 237 (9th Cir. 1990), and affirm.

A claim for breach of the duty of fair representation is subject to the six-month statute of limitations set forth in Section 10(d) of the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 160(d). Kalombo v. Hughes Market, Inc., 886 F.2d 258, 259 (9th Cir. 1989); see DelCostello v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 155 (1983). The statute of limitations begins to run when the employee knows or should have known that the union would not pursue his grievance. See Harris v. Alumax Mill Prods., Inc., 897 F.2d 400, 404 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 835 (1990).

Here, the Union informed Jones by the end of April 1992 that it would not pursue his grievance. Jones did not file his complaint until March 12, 1993, almost one year later. Accordingly, Jones' action is time-barred. See id.

AFFIRMED.²