Inechien v. Nichols Aluminum, LLC, et al., No. 12-3734 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit against his employer (Nichols) for breach of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and against his union for breach of its duty of fair representation. Plaintiff alleged that Nichols breached the CBA by failing to establish rest periods for workers on the continuously operating lines as required by Section 17.1 of the CBA. In this case, the union had a duty not to pursue a grievance to arbitration that it believed did not warrant such action. The court concluded that plaintiff had not raised a genuine issue of material fact on whether the union failed in its duty of fair representation on the issue before the court. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the union and the employer.
Court Description: Civil case - Labor Law. The Union had reasons to believe that arbitration of an issue regarding scheduled rest breaks would not be successful, and its decision not to pursue a grievance was not arbitrary or a breach of its duty of fair representation; since summary judgment in favor of the Union was properly granted, summary judgment in favor of the employer was also proper. [ August 27, 2013
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.