UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 600, AFL-CIO v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, LLOYD STONER - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Karen Belcher on Apr 13, 2020

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON BRIEF: Seth Matus, MATUS LAW OFFICE, P.C., Naperville, Illinois, James R. Andary, ANDARY LAW GROUP, Mt. Clemons, Michigan, for Petitioner/Cross-Respondent.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: Usha Dheenan, Brady Francisco-FitzMaurice, David Habensreit, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D.C., for Respondent/Cross-Petitioner.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Alyssa K. Hazelwood, Glenn M. Taubman, NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION, INC., Springfield, Virginia, for Intervenor.

Judge(s): SUHRHEINRICH, BUSH, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. After paying union dues for twenty-four years to UAW Local 600 (“Union”), Lloyd Stoner (“Stoner”) decided in February 2018 to resign from the Union.1 The Union failed to promptly notify Stoner’s employer, Ford Motor Company (“Ford”), allegedly due to a clerical error. Ford therefore continued to deduct dues from Stoner’s paycheck for two months and remit them to the Union. This prompted Stoner to file an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”). The Board held that the Union’s failure to promptly process Stoner’s resignation of union membership violated Section 8(b)(1)(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 151–169 (the “Act”), in two ways: first, by “restraining” Stoner’s right to withdraw from the Union, and, second, by breaching the Union’s duty of “fair representation.” The Union has filed a petition for review of that decision, and the Board has filed a cross-application for enforcement.