Bradford, Jr. v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., No. 12-16469 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseAfter petitioner was terminated from Union Pacific, he filed suit challenging the Public Law Board decision affirming his termination by the railroad. The court concluded that there was no violation of petitioner's due process rights where the railroad company was a private actor with respect to the on-property hearing; the Board provided petitioner with adequate due process where the Board's sufficient procedures provided him with an opportunity to be heard before he was terminated, and where the Board considered all the evidence it was required to consider; the Board did not err regarding on-property investigative hearing deficiencies; and the Board did not violate the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. 153(i). Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Labor Law. The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment rejecting petitioner’s challenge to a Public Law Board arbitration decision affirming the termination of his employment with a railroad. The panel held that there was no violation of petitioner’s due process rights in a preliminary on-property investigative hearing because the railroad company was a private actor with respect to the hearing. The panel held that the Public Law Board did not violate petitioner’s due process rights because the procedures it used did not present a meaningful risk of a erroneous deprivation of petitioner’s interest in maintaining his employment. The Board also did not err regarding procedural deficiencies in the on-property hearing because it was acting within its jurisdiction, and its decision not to remedy alleged procedural violations was beyond the scope of judicial review. The panel concluded that the Board considered a complete record and did not violate the Railway Labor Act.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.