Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-01573/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-01573-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 720
Nature of Suit: Labor Management Relations Act
Cause of Action: 29:184 Violation Collection Bargain Agreement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Chas Roberts Air Conditioning, Inc., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Sheet Metal Workers International

Association, Local Union 359,

Defendant. 

Sheet Metal Workers International

Association, Local Union 359,

Counter Claimant,

vs.

Chas Roberts Air Conditioning, Inc.,

Counter Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 04-1573 PHX NVW

ORDER

Before the court is Chas Roberts Air Conditioning, Inc.'s Motion for Reconsideration

and Motion for Stay of Arbitration Proceedings (doc. #61), the Response (doc. # 62) and

Declaration (doc. # 63), and the Reply (doc. # 65). Also before the court is the Motion to

Supplement Reply (doc. #66). 

By order of May 4, 2005 (doc. #49), this court set aside the Joint Adjustment Board

award of July 13, 2004, and remanded this matter to the Board for further proceedings,

Case 2:04-cv-01573-NVW Document 67 Filed 10/14/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

including a determination of whether the collective bargaining agreement remains in effect

or has expired. In its motion, plaintiff Chas Roberts Air Conditioning, Inc., seeks

reconsideration of the May 4, 2005 order and a stay of the arbitration proceedings, now

scheduled for October 20, 2005, because of the supposed taint of the July 2005 Local No.

359 Newsletter addressed to all union members, including presumably the new Board

members. The newsletter states, “The federal court saw merit in the grievances that we filed

against Chas Roberts over a year ago. The federal judge referred these grievances back to

the Local Joint Adjustment Board, where they will be reviewed once again by a new panel.

As they find merit with these grievances, then the Unfair Labor Practice charges will also be

reviewed again by the National Labor Relations Board.”

The quoted passage from the newsletter is palpably false to the extent it states, “The

federal court saw merit in the grievances that we filed against Chas Roberts over a year ago.”

As is apparent from a plain reading of the May 4, 2005 order (or of this order), this court

found no merit to either side's substantive positions. Rather, this court found that the

question of the expiration or continuing effect of the collective bargaining agreement is a

matter for arbitration before the Board, that the Board made no such determination, and that

the Board should do so with a freshly constituted panel.

The circumstance that, by agreement of the parties, the Board is made up of equal

numbers of representatives from both sides does not make the union representative members

any more incapable of serving as arbitrators than the management representative members.

Cf. United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO v. Arizona Agricultural Employment

Relations Board, 727 F.2d 1475 (9th Cir. 1984) (en banc) (tri-partite composition of state

agricultural labor relations board, with equal numbers of union and management members,

does not violate due process). The notion that Board members cannot separate out what they

read in the media from what the otherwise know to be true is unpersuasive.

The court cannot discern how these circumstances warrant either reconsideration of

the May 4, 2005 order or a stay of the scheduled October 20, 2005 Board proceeding. The

members of the new Board can read this court's orders and discern their obvious meaning.

Case 2:04-cv-01573-NVW Document 67 Filed 10/14/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Supplement Reply (doc. #66) is

granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Chas Roberts Air Condition, Inc.'s Motion for

Reconsideration and Motion for Stay of Arbitration Proceedings (doc. #61) is denied.

DATED this 14th day of October, 2005.

Case 2:04-cv-01573-NVW Document 67 Filed 10/14/05 Page 3 of 3