Inland Empire Chapter v. Johnson

Citations: 31 Wash. App. 630; 644 P.2d 688; 1982 Wash. App. LEXIS 2761Docket: No. 4127-1-III

Court: Court of Appeals of Washington; April 22, 1982; Washington; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

The Inland Empire Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) appeals a summary judgment favoring Releo Electric, Inc. (Releo), a former member of NECA. NECA alleges that Releo improperly withdrew from the association, violating contractual notice provisions. Releo had previously entered an interim agreement with Local 497 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers to avoid a work stoppage affecting NECA members and agreed to adhere to contracts negotiated by NECA. NECA sought damages for breach of contract, while Releo contended there was no contract and moved for summary judgment. NECA countered by asserting Releo's withdrawal constituted an unfair labor practice. Releo argued that the state court lacked jurisdiction over the labor dispute, which was ruled to fall exclusively under the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) due to federal preemption under the National Labor Relations Act. The ruling emphasized that any labor dispute, including those involving associations of employers, is under the NLRB's jurisdiction to prevent state interference with federal labor policy. Although there are NLRB rules regarding withdrawal from multi-employer bargaining units, no violations were alleged, and the case was determined to be a dispute strictly between an employer bargaining unit and a member, devoid of union or employee involvement. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Employer bargaining unit disputes with members that do not affect labor negotiations fall outside the scope of the preemption doctrine. Intraunion disputes, such as those between a union and its members involving tort or contract claims, are governed by state jurisdiction, as established in previous cases. For instance, the International Association of Machinists v. Gonzales emphasized that the nature of the pleadings must be assessed to determine jurisdiction, where no unfair labor practices were identified. Similarly, disputes between employer bargaining units and members can also be adjudicated in state courts.

The 'peripheral concern' doctrine indicates that if the potential for conflict between state action and federal policy is minimal, federal jurisdiction does not apply, particularly if the core of the dispute is internal to the union or bargaining unit. Concurrent jurisdiction may exist where federal control over labor issues does not preclude state authority to resolve contract and tort claims, as seen in Smith v. Evening News Association. If tort or contract claims are closely tied to labor issues, they may fall under the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board, but if they can be reasonably tried separately, states should assume jurisdiction.

The current case requires further factual determination to ascertain whether the core issue involves a labor dispute. The enforceability of a contract between NECA and Releo, a union member, is also in question, as is NECA's claim that the withdrawal of a member from a multi-employer bargaining unit constitutes a labor dispute. This argument is challenged by the existence of NLRB rules governing such withdrawals, which, if adhered to, do not constitute unfair labor practices and thus do not engage federal preemption. Finally, NECA's assertion of a claim under 29 U.S.C. § 185(a) is dismissed as no labor organization is involved, rendering the exclusion inapplicable.