International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 2150 v. Nextera Energy Point Beach LLC

Citations: 223 F. Supp. 3d 815; 2016 WL 6997495; 207 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3639; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165120Docket: Case No. 13-C-0724

Court: District Court, E.D. Wisconsin; November 29, 2016; Federal District Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

The court denied NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC's motion for summary judgment and granted the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 2150's (IBEW) motion for summary judgment concerning a grievance filed by IBEW on behalf of two employees. NextEra argued that the grievance regarding access to its nuclear facility was not arbitrable under the collective bargaining agreement; however, the court ruled in favor of IBEW following a related Seventh Circuit decision that affirmed IBEW's position. 

IBEW represents workers at the Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant, which NextEra acquired from Wisconsin Electric Power Company, assuming existing collective bargaining agreements, including the '2004-2007 Blue Book.' This agreement included a multi-step dispute resolution procedure, allowing for arbitration of grievances not satisfactorily resolved. A prior arbitration award in 2006 determined that a grievance related to employee access was not arbitrable, but the court's recent ruling contradicts NextEra's stance on this grievance, emphasizing the binding nature of the arbitration clause in the collective bargaining agreements. Following the expiration of the 2004-2007 agreement, IBEW and NextEra entered into three subsequent agreements, the latest covering 2013-2016.

IBEW did not propose any arbitration terms for unescorted-access decisions or seek to modify the impact of the 2006 Suntrup Award during negotiations for the successor Blue Book collective bargaining agreements. The relevant collective bargaining agreement, the 2010-2013 Blue Book, was in effect from August 16, 2010, to September 15, 2013. Key provisions of Articles 17 and 18 in the 2010-2013 Blue Book mirrored those in the 2004-2007 Blue Book relied upon by Arbitrator Suntrup. Article 8 affirmed the Company’s exclusive rights over employment decisions and operational management, while Article 11 outlined the disciplinary process, requiring specific charges to be communicated to employees and allowing for temporary suspensions during investigations. Employees must be given a chance to present their cases before any disciplinary actions, with seniority rights preserved despite disciplinary layoffs. The 2010-2013 Blue Book included a four-step grievance procedure in Article 17, encouraging prompt discussion of grievances between employees and supervisors.

Supervisors are required to promptly schedule meetings to address employee grievances. If unresolved, employees and stewards must prepare a written grievance detailing specific facts and alleged violations of the Labor Agreement. The steward will notify the supervisor’s superior of the Union's intent to pursue the grievance, prompting a meeting and written decision following an investigation. If the grievance is not resolved, the Union may escalate it to higher management levels. For disciplinary issues that remain unresolved, the Union can appeal to the officer-in-charge, and if still unresolved, arbitration may be sought, with the arbitrator's decisions being binding unless contrary to law. The arbitrator's role is limited to interpreting the Agreement without extending its terms or jurisdiction. NextEra's 'Access Authorization and Fitness for Duty Program' involves ongoing assessments for individuals granted unescorted access, including background checks and drug screenings, without input from IBEW. IBEW does not participate in evaluations of access eligibility and has no role in determining qualifications. NextEra allows individuals denied access to appeal decisions through an independent management review panel.

The affected individual has the right to counsel and may present any materials or arguments during a de novo review by a panel regarding access decisions. NextEra's Access and Fitness Program operates independently, with unescorted access decisions based solely on its established standards, without reference to other company documents, including the 2010-2013 Blue Book. The Blue Book mentions that employees in the bargaining unit will not be treated less favorably than those in other units concerning psychological interviews related to access, and it allows for the review of information provided by the Union on access denial within the appeals timeline.

All employees at Point Beach must maintain unescorted access authorization. Michael Walker and Clyde Engelbrecht, full-time employees from May 2010 to February 2013 and members of IBEW, lost their unescorted access due to unauthorized access to a restricted security locker. NextEra revoked their access, citing a lack of trustworthiness, effective February 7, 2013. Walker appealed on February 15, and Engelbrecht on February 18, both represented by counsel. An independent appeal panel reviewed the cases and upheld the revocation on February 28, 2013.

On March 5, 2013, IBEW filed grievances for Walker and Engelbrecht, claiming wrongful termination related to access denial without due process, seeking reinstatement and compensation. NextEra responded on March 11, 2013, stating that an arbitrator previously determined that access denial is not subject to grievance procedures, thus denying the grievance based on Article 17, Section 17.1(4) of the Blue Book.

On April 3, 2013, IBEW communicated to NextEra its intention to pursue grievances concerning the termination of employees Engelbrecht and Walker, proposing to hold the grievances in abeyance pending a court resolution regarding Jon Hofstra's grievance arbitration. NextEra responded on April 10, asserting that the grievances were not subject to arbitration under the existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) and referenced a prior ruling in the Suntrup Case, which determined that nuclear access decisions were not arbitrable. IBEW subsequently clarified its request for arbitration for the grievances, which NextEra again refused, citing Article 18.1 of the CBA, which mandates adherence to arbitrator decisions unless contrary to law. 

NextEra explained that the denial of access for Engelbrecht and Walker was not punitive but a compliance measure related to its obligations as a nuclear licensee. It further noted that the Union had opportunities to negotiate new contract language regarding arbitrability but failed to do so and has not demonstrated any legal violations by Arbitrator Suntrup’s prior decision, which remains binding. 

NextEra maintained that the issues related to the employees' access and termination were not arbitrable under the CBA, and referenced a 2014 Seventh Circuit ruling that found a similar grievance arbitrable under a different agreement, emphasizing the contractual nature of arbitration agreements. The principle established is that arbitration is a matter of contract, and parties cannot be compelled to arbitrate disputes they have not agreed to submit.

Requests to deny arbitration for a grievance can only be upheld if there is 'positive assurance' that a collective bargaining agreement's arbitration clause does not cover the grievance. The burden of proof lies with the party opposing arbitration, which must present strong evidence to counter the presumption of arbitrability, especially when the clause is broadly written. Courts assess the arbitration clause and relevant evidence from the agreement's formation to determine coverage. Ambiguities in the agreement favor arbitration, and nonarbitrability requires a clear reservation of managerial authority. 

In this case, the 2010-2013 Blue Book's broad language regarding employee grievances, including job performance and workplace matters, suggests it encompasses disputes like access privileges. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) seeks arbitration for issues related to two employees' access rights, which falls within the Blue Book's provisions for unresolved grievances. NextEra contends that access disputes are not included in the Blue Book, arguing that the court cannot compel arbitration without the arbitrator’s authority to review such matters. However, the Seventh Circuit's prior ruling indicates that exclusions from arbitration must be explicitly stated in the agreement, and since access issues are not explicitly reserved for management in the Blue Book, they are not excluded from arbitration. Therefore, the arbitrability of the access issue remains a matter for arbitration itself, regardless of the outcome of the arbitrator’s review.

The Seventh Circuit found that NextEra failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate an intent to exclude grievances from arbitration. The absence of specific language in the 2010-2013 Blue Book regarding the grievance does not indicate a relinquishment of arbitration rights. The previous arbitration decision involving Suntrup, which dealt with unrelated parties and circumstances, does not bind this case or provide precedent, as arbitration awards do not carry the same precedential weight as judicial decisions. NextEra's internal review process for unescorted access decisions does not imply an intention to exclude such matters from arbitration, particularly concerning employee discharge. Consequently, because NextEra could not prove that the grievances raised by IBEW were intentionally excluded from arbitration during negotiations, the court ruled that NextEra must arbitrate the grievances of Walker and Engelbrecht. The court denied NextEra's motion for summary judgment and granted IBEW's motion for summary judgment. Additionally, any differences between the arbitration provisions in the 2010-2013 Blue Book and the prior agreements are deemed immaterial.