Lockhart v. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp. , 51 F. App'x 622 ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 02-1831
    ___________
    Dewayne Lockhart,                       *
    *
    Appellant,                 *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                * District Court for the
    * Eastern District of Arkansas.
    Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation; *
    Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical &    *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Energy Workers International Union, *
    *
    Appellees.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 6, 2002
    Filed: December 2, 2002
    ___________
    Before HANSEN, Chief Judge, BEAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Dewayne Lockhart appeals from the district court's1 grant of summary
    judgment in favor of Lockhart's employer, Stone Container Corporation ("Stone"),
    and PACE International Union (the "Union"). After Stone terminated Lockhart for
    violating sexual-harassment and workplace-violence policies, he brought this action
    1
    The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the
    Eastern District of Arkansas.
    under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, alleging
    unfair representation by the Union and breach of contract by Stone. We affirm.
    In order to prevail in a hybrid claim under section 301 against both an
    employer and a union, an employee must prove both the union's breach of its duty of
    fair representation and the employer's breach of the collective bargaining agreement.
    Scott v. United Auto., 
    242 F.3d 837
    , 840 (8th Cir. 2001) (citing Vaca v. Sipes, 
    386 U.S. 171
    , 186-87 (1967)). A court must find unfair representation by the union
    before considering the merits of a section 301 claim against an employer. Buford v.
    Runyon, 
    160 F.3d 1199
    , 1201 (8th Cir. 1998). A union breaches its duty of fair
    representation only when its conduct is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.
    
    Vaca, 386 U.S. at 190
    . To survive a motion for summary judgment on the issue of
    bad faith, an employee must demonstrate fraud, deceitful action, or dishonest conduct
    by the union. Baxter v. United Paperworkers Int'l Union, Local 7370, 
    140 F.3d 745
    ,
    747 (8th Cir. 1998). Lockhart has simply not met this burden.
    It may be that the Union could have performed a more rigorous and thorough
    investigation in this case, but we grant unions "broad latitude" in dealing with their
    members and review their performance in "a highly deferential light." Pegump v.
    Rockwell Int'l Corp., 
    109 F.3d 442
    , 444 (8th Cir. 1997). The Union was certainly
    within that latitude in its disposition of this case. Because Lockhart cannot establish
    unfair representation by the Union, his claim against Stone for breach of contract
    must also fail. Accordingly, we affirm the grant of summary judgment.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-1831

Citation Numbers: 51 F. App'x 622

Judges: Hansen, Beam, Smith

Filed Date: 12/2/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024