Carpenters v. Metal Trades, No. 13-35095 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseIn 2008, the Building Trades, an umbrella labor organization, launched the "Push-Back-Carpenters Campaign" to force the Carpenters to reaffiliate with the Building Trades. The Building Trades then enlisted the Metal Trades to expel the Carpenters from its membership. The Carpenters subsequently filed suit alleging that the Metal Trades, both by itself and through its non-party affiliates, breached the federal duty of fair representation. The district court dismissed the Carpenters' complaint and amended complaint for failure to state a claim. The court held that a union's selecting stewards from whom it might expect undivided loyalty is not unreasonable discrimination and does not, without more, breach the duty of fair representation. In this case, the Carpenters failed to allege that the Metal Trades removed Carpenters' members from positions as stewards for any reason other than union affiliation. Even if the Metal Trades singled out Carpenters-affiliated workers because of their union affiliation, the Carpenters' complaint fails to state a breach of the duty of fair representation as a matter of law. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's judgment.
Court Description: Labor Law. The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America’s action alleging that the Metal Trades Department, AFL-CIO, violated the federal duty of fair representation. The Carpenters, a labor union, alleged that, as part of a campaign to force it to reaffiliate, the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, an umbrella labor organization, convinced the Metal Trades to expel the Carpenters from its membership. The Carpenters alleged that the Metal Trades waged a campaign against Carpenters members that included stripping them of their preferential positions as union stewards solely because they were members of the Carpenters. The panel held that the Carpenters failed to state a claim for breach of the duty of fair representation because this duty does not forbid consideration of union affiliation in the appointment and removal of stewards. The panel held that a union’s selecting stewards from whom it might expect undivided loyalty¯that is, from members of an affiliated union, rather than an unaffiliated union¯is not unreasonable discrimination and does not, without more, breach the duty of fair representation.
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.