2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 11-25-2009 

# G ary H ark ins v . U SX C orp P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 09-1570

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " G ary H arkin s v

. U S X C orp " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 195. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/195NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

_____________ N o. 09- 1570

_____________ G A R Y H A R K IN S , A p p e llan t,

v. U N IT E D S T A T E S S T E E L C O R P O R A T IO N ; U N I T E D ST E E L W O R K E R S O F A M E R I C A , L O C A L 4889, A pp el l ees.

_______________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . N o. 07- cv- 5206) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J ohn P. Ful l m an

_______________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

N ovember5, 2009 B e f o re : S C IR IC A , C hi ef

Judge , J O R D A N a n d C O W E N , C i r cui tJudges . ( Fi l ed: N ovember25, 2009 )

_______________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

_______________ J O R D A N , C i r cui tJudge . A ppel l antG aryH arki ns appea l s an or derof the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tfort he E as t ern D i s tr i ctof Penns y l vani a gr ant i ng s um m aryj udgm enti n favorof A ppel l eesA ccor di ng t o U . S. St eel ’ s C orpor at e D i s cl os ur e St at ement , the ca s e capt i on had 1 i n c o rr e c t l y i d e n t i f

i e d i ta s U S X C o rp o r a t i o n . W e h a v e c o rr e c t e d th e c a p t i o n a c c o r d i n g l y. 2 U ni t ed St at es St eel C orpor at i on ( “U . S. St eel ”) and U ni t ed St eel w or ker s of A m er i ca, 1 L ocal U ni on 4889 ( “U SW ”) on hi s cl ai m under§ 301 of the LaborR el at i ons M anage m entA ct , 29 U . S. C . § 185. H arki ns cl ai m s thatU . S. St eel vi ol at ed the col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng agr eementw hen i tdeni ed hi m an adva ncementoppor tuni tyand gave i ti ns t ead t o T hom as M ul é. M or e part i cul ar l y , he s ay s thatbecaus e he i s m or e qual i fi ed forthe pos i t i on than M ul é and ha s m or e s eni or i ty , i tw as w r ong forU . S. St eel t o gi ve M ul é the j ob. H arki ns al s o cl ai m s thatU SW br eac hed i t s dutyof fa i rr epr es ent at i on by m is h a n d lin g th e g ri e v a n c e h e f ile d w ith U S W a f

te r U .S . S te e l d e n ie d h im th e p o s itio n . B e c a u se th e re a re n o g e n u in e iss u e s o f m a ter ial f

a c t an d A p p e llee s a re e n tit led to ju d g m e n t a s a m a tte r o f la w , w e w ill a f

f ir m . I . Backg r ound A. U. S. St eel

, U SW , and the C ol l ect i ve Bargai ni ng A gr eem ent U . S. St eel ow ns and oper at es s t eel m aki ng pl ant s , i ncl udi ng the Fai r l es s W or ks fac i l i tyi n Fai r l es s H i l l s , Penns y l vani a. U SW i s a l ocal uni on of the U ni t ed St eel , Paper an d F o restry , R u b b er, M an u fa cturing , E n erg y , A ll ied In d u str ial an d S erv ice W o rke rs I nt e rna t i on a l U ni on , a nd r e pr e s e nt s ho ur l ypr od uc t i on a nd mai nt e na nc e w orke r s a tU . S. S te e l’ s F a ir le s s W o rk s p la n t. O n M ay20, 2003, U . S. St eel and U SW ent er ed i nt o a col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng a g r e e me n t , whi c h th e yr e f e rt o a s th e 2 0 0 3 Ba s i c La b o rAgr e e me n t( “ BLA ” ) . Th e BLA3

g o v e rn s th e p ro c e s s f

o r a w a rd in g jo b s w ith in th e F a ir le s s W o rk s p la n t. P u rs u a n t to § E .7 of the B L A , w hen a j ob becomes avai l abl e, U . S. St eel m us tpos ta bi d s heetthr oughout the pl ant , and empl oy ees can appl yforthe j ob bys i gni ng the bi d s heet . U . S. St eel aw ar ds the b i d in accordanc e w i th § E . 1. c of the B L A , w hich st at es: I n al l cas es of pr om ot i ons , decr eas es i n for ce a nd r eca l l s aft erl ay offs , the fol l ow i ng fac t or s s hal l be cons i der ed: ( 1) abi l i tyt o per form the w or k and phy s i cal fi tnes s ; and (2) P lant C o n ti n u o u s S erv ice (P lant S erv ice). W h e re f a c to r (1 ) is re lativ e lye q u a l b e tw e e n e m p lo y e e s, P lan t S e rv ice sh a ll b e th e d e te rm in in g f

a c to r. ( A pp. at221. ) T hus , w hen mul t i pl e empl oy ees appl yforthe s ame posi t i on, U . S. St eel fi rs tcon si ders the rel at i ve ab i l i tyof ea ch em ploy ee t o p erform the w ork, and the m ost qual i fi ed empl oy ee i s aw ar ded the pos i t i on, r egar dl es s of s eni or i ty . O nl yw hen the abi l i t i es of compet i ng empl oy ees ar e r el at i vel yequal does s eni or i tybecome the d e te rm in in g f

a c to r. B . W al t erH ar t el and Job Bi d N

o. G H - 2006- 02 W al t erH art el w as a s y s t ems r epai r m an w ho hel d the t i t l e of M ai nt enanc e T echni ci an ( E l ectr i cal ) and w as one of the mostknow l edgea bl e and e xper i ence d e m p lo y e e s in th e “ G a lv a n iz e d L in e ” M a in te n a n c e D e p a rt m e n t a t th e F a ir le s s W o rk s p la n t. H art el w as part i cul ar l yknow n forhi s expert i s e i n el ectr oni cs . W hen the manager s of the M ai nt enanc e D epart m entl earned, i n ear l y2006, thatH art el w oul d s oon be r et i r i ng, they convey ed t o Susa nna Show , the St aff Super vi s orof Per s onnel , and Pr es t on H ender s on,4

the M anage rof Em pl oy ee Rel at i ons , the i m por t ance of r epl aci ng H art el w i th s om eone h a v in g sig n if

ica n t ele c tro n ics e x p e rie n c e . A c c o rd in g ly , w h e n U .S . S tee l so u g h t to r epl ace H art el bypos t i ng J ob B i d N o. G H - 2006- 02 forthe pos i t i on of “M ai nt enanc e T e c h n i c i a n ( E l e c tr i c a l ) , ” th e b i d s h e e ts t a t e d th a t“ E M P L OYE E M US T HAVE E L E C T R I C A L / E L E C T R O N I C E X PE R I E N C E . ” H arki ns and Thom as M ul é w er e among th e f o u r e m p lo y e e s w h o sig n e d th e b id sh e e t. C . Q ual i

f i cat i ons of

Mul é and H

arki ns 1. T h o m a s Mu lé T hom as M ul é i s a mem berof the U SW and w as hi r ed byU . S. St eel i n 1987 as an E lec tro n ic R e p a irm a n . W h e n M u lé w a s h ire d , h e w a s re q u ire d to tak e th e sy ste m s re p a ir t es tas an pr er equi s i t e forthe El ectr oni c R epai r m an j ob. T he s y s t ems r epai rt es tas s es s es k n o wl e d g e o f

e l e c tr o n i c s a n d e l e c tr i c a l s u b j e c t s , mo t o r s , i n s tru me n t a t i o n , a n d p h y s i c s . At the t i m e, U . S. St eel had tw o gr oups of el ectr oni cs r el at ed r epai r m en pos i t i ons : the E lec tro n ic R e p a irm a n , an d th e In stru m e n tatio n R e p a irm a n . In 1 9 8 8 , U .S .S tee l d e c id e d to m erg e the tw o p o sit ion s. T h u s, the In stru m en t R ep airm en w ere cro ss-traine d to learn el ectr oni cs r epai r s and the El ectr oni c R epai r m en w er e cr os s tr ai ned t o l earn i ns trum ent rep airs. O n ce the in d ividu als h ad tr ainin g an d k n o w ledg e in b o th are as, th e g rou p s w ere form al l ym er ged i nt o one gr oup cal l ed Sy s t ems R epai r m en. I n or dert o become a S y s te m s R e p a ir m a n a t th a t tim e , a ll e m p lo y e e s h a d to ta k e th e s y s te m s re p a irte s t.5

M ul é w or ked as a Sy s t ems R epai r m an unt i l 1991, w hen he w as l ai d off. H e w as r eca l l ed i n 1994 and aga i n w or ked i n thats ame posi t i on. D ur i ng both of thos e per i ods w ith U .S . S tee l, M u lé w o rk e d in th e M a in ten a n c e D e p a rtm e n t w ith W a lter H a rte l. M u lé w as agai n l ai d off i n 2001. A tthe t i m e of hi s l ay off, he w as a Sy s t ems R epai r m an and had w or ked as s uch dur i ng the ent i r e l ength of hi s empl oym entw i th the exc ept i on of the s h o rt p e ri o d o f

tim e w h e n h e in itia lly w o rk e d a s a n E le c tr o n ic R e p a ir m a n . 2. G ar

y H arki ns H arki ns i s al s o a mem berof the U SW and bega n hi s empl oym entw i th U . S. St eel i n 1973. A tthe t i m e H arki ns appl i ed t o be cons i der ed forJ ob B i d N o. G H - 2006- 02, he w as an O per at i ng T echni ci an w i th s i gni fi cantel ectr i cal exper i ence butl i m i t ed el ectr oni cs exper i ence , and he ha d neverw or ked as a Sy s t ems R epai r m an. E ar l yi n hi s car eeratt he F a irles s W o rk s f

a c ili ty , H a rk in s w o rk e d o n th e p ro d u c tio n lin e in th e sh e e t an d tin di vi s i on. Fr om 1989 thr ough 1990, he att ended the El ectr i cal L earner s Pr ogr am atB ucks C ou ntyC om m un i tyC oll ege, w here he took class es ent i t l ed P ri ncipl es of E l ect roni cs, I ndus tr i al E l ectr oni cs , I ntr oduct i on t o D i gi t al Sy s t ems, E l ectr oni c C i r cui t s , and El ectr i cal C ir c u it A n a lysis . H a rk in s b e c a m e a M o to r I n s p e c to r o n th e s o -c a lle d “ P ic k le L in e ,” w h e re h is re sp o n sib ili ties in c lu d e d re p a irs, p re v e n tativ e m a in ten a n c e , an d “ [ a ]n ya n d a ll jo b s e le c tr ic a l.” (A p p . a t 2 0 .) H e a ls o d id s o m e e le c tr o n ic s w o rk a t th e p la n t. H arki ns has neverw or ked as an El ectr oni c R epai r m an, I ns trum entR epai r m an, or as a Sy s t ems R epai r m an. Fur therm or e, H arki ns neverw or ked i n the M ai nt enanc e6

D epart m entw i th W al t erH art el . H arki ns pas s ed the op- t ech t es t , buthas nevert aken the sy ste m s re p a ir tes t. T h e o p -te c h tes t d if f e rs s ig n if ica n tlyf ro m th e sy ste m s re p a ir tes t in thati tm eas ur es el ectr i cal abi l i ty , w her eas the s y s t ems r epai rt es tm eas ur es el ectr oni cs a b ility, w h ic h , a c c o rd in g to th e re c o rd , is a d is tin c tio n w ith a d if f e re n c e . D . U.S. S tee l A w a rd s B id to Mu lé On F e b ru a r y2 1 , 2 0 0 6 , U. S . S t e e l a n n o u n c e d th a ti th a d a wa r d e d J o b Bi d No . GH2006- 02 t o M ul é. T he dec i s i on t o aw ar d the bi d t o M ul é w as m ade byPr es t on H ender s on, the company ’ s E m pl oy ee Rel at i ons m anage r . B as ed upon hi s know l edge of H arki ns ’ s w or k hi s t oryand M ul é’ s w or k hi s t ory , H ender s on bel i eved thatH arki ns had a sm a ll am o u n t o f

e lec tro n ics e x p e rie n c e , b u t th a t M u lé “ h a d sig n if ica n t ele c tro n ic ex p erien ce . ” (A p p . at 82 . ) Ind ee d , M u lé ha d p rev iou slyw o rke d in tha t fi eld w ith M r. H art el , the man bei ng r epl ace d. I n compar i ng M ul é’ s and H arki ns ’ s exper i ence , H e n d e rs o n f

e lt th a t M u lé h a d s ig n if ic a n tly g re a te r r e le v a n t e x p e ri e n c e th a n H a rk in s . G i ven the i m pendi ng departur e of M r . H art el and the nee d t o r epl ace hi m w i th s om eone w ho had el ectr oni cs exper i ence , H ender s on det erm i ned “M ul é fi tthatbi l l . ” (Id . ) T h e re f o re , o n F e b ru a ry2 1 , 2 0 0 6 , Jo b B id N o . G H -2 0 0 6 -0 2 w a s o f f icia llya w a rd e d to M u lé . A ft erthe bi d w as aw ar ded, H arki ns appr oache d U SW aboutfi l i ng a gr i evanc e bas ed on hi s s eni or i tyand hi s bel i ef thathe w as atl eas tas qual i fi ed forthe pos i t i on as M ul é. T he U SW fi l ed a gr i evanc e on H arki ns ’ s behal f on February27, 2006, w hi ch w as7

d en ied b ym an ag em en t atU . S . S teel at st ep s o n e a n d tw o o f th e g ri ev an ce p roc ed u re o u tli n e d in th e B L A . U .S . S tee l m a in tain e d th a t M u lé’ s q u a lific a tio n s w e re su p e rio r to th o se p o ss e ss e d b yH a rk in s. A t th a t p o in t in th e g rie v a n c e p ro c e e d in g s, U S W b e liev e d it c o u ld n o t w in in a rb itr a tio n w ith o u t m o re e v id e n c e o f H a rk in s ’s q u a lif

ic a tio n s . T her efor e, i n an att empt t o s how thatH arki ns di d i n fac tpos s es s el ectr oni cs know l edge c o m p a ra b le to th a t o f

M u lé’ s, U S W p ro p o se d to U .S . S tee l th a t H a rk in s b e a llo w e d to t ake the s y s t ems r epai rt es t . H arki ns has nott aken the t es t , and U SW has nott aken a ny f u rth e r a c tio n o n th e g rie v a n c e , ag a in d u e to its b e lief th a t itw o u ld b e u n su c c e ss f u l in a rb itr a tio n w ith o u t f

u rt h e r e v id e n c e o f

H a rk in s ’s q u a lif

ic a tio n s . E . P rocedu ralHistory O n D ece m ber10, 2007, H arki ns fi l ed the compl ai nti n thi s cas e aga i ns tU . S. St eel and U SW underSect i on 301 of the LaborM anage m entR el at i ons A ct( the “A ct ”) , 29 U . S. C . § 185. H arki ns al l eges thatU . S. St eel br eac hed the B L A bygi vi ng M ul é the j ob o v e r h im a n d th a t U S W b re a c h e d its d u tyo f f a ir re p re se n tatio n b ym ish a n d lin g h is g ri ev an ce . F o ll o w ing d isco v eryan d b ri ef ing , the D istri ct C o u rtg ran ted s u m m ary jud g m en t i n fa v o r of

U . S . S teel an d U S W . T h e C o u rtco n clud ed that a re aso n ab le j u ry c o u ld n o t f

in d th a t a b re a c h o f

th e B L A h a d o c c u rre d . C o n se q u e n tly , the C o u rt f o u n d it unnece s s aryt o deci de w hetherU SW had handl ed H arki ns ’ s gr i evanc e pr oper l y . H arki ns f iled a m o tio n f

o r re c o n sid e ra tio n , w h ich th e D istric t C o u rt d e n ied . H a rk in s f iled th is tim e ly ap p e a l o n F e b ru a ry 2 5 , 2 0 0 9 .T h e D istric t C o u rt h a d ju risd ictio n p u rsu a n t to th e L a b o r M a n a g e m e n t R e latio n s A c t, 2 2 9 U .S .C . § 1 8 5 a n d 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 3 1 . W e h a v e ju risd ictio n o v e r th is a p p e a l p u rsu a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . 8 I I . D i s cus s i on 2 W e e x e rc ise p len a ryre v iew o v e r a n a p p e a l f ro m a g ra n t o f

su m m a ryju d g m e n t, w h ic h m e a n s w e a p p ly th e s a m e s ta n d a rd u s e d b yth e D is tr ic t C o u rt . Jacobs C ons tr uctors , I

nc. v. N P S E ner gy Ser vs . , I

nc. , 2 6 4 F .3 d 3 6 5 , 3 6 9 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). Sum m aryj udgm enti s appr opr i at e i f ther e i s no genui ne i s s ue of mat er i al fac tand the m o v in g p a rt yis e n title d to ju d g m e n t a s a m a tte r o f la w . Id . ( ci t i ng Fed. R . C i v. Pr oc. 56( c) . “I n m aki ng thi s det erm i nat i on, w e mustcons i derthe evi dence i n the r ecor d i n the l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he nonmovi ng party . ” Id . A s thi s cas e i nvol ves both a cl ai m forbr eac h of a c ol l ect i ve bar gai ni ng agr eement agai ns tan empl oy erand a c l ai m forbr eac h of the dutyof fa i rr epr es ent at i on agai ns tt he u n io n , it is c o n s id e re d a h yb ri d c la im u n d e r S e c tio n 3 0 1 o f th e A c t. D elC o stel lo v. Int’l B hd . of Team st ers , 46 2 U. S. 15 1, 16 5 ( 19 83 ) . H a r ki ns c a nn otpr e va i l a ga i ns te i the rU . S. St eel orU SW on hi s hybr i d cl ai m unl es s he ca n pr ove both thatU . S. St eel vi ol at ed the c o lle c tiv e b a rg a in in g a g re e m e n t a n d th a t U S W b re a c h e d its d u ty o f f a irre p re s e n ta tio n . Id . a t 1 6 4 -6 5 . T he D i s tr i ctC our tpr oper l yconcl uded thatH arki ns di d notpr oduce e nough evi dence t o al l ow a r eas onabl e j uryt o fi nd thatU . S. St eel had br eac hed the B L A . T he evi dence s how s thatU . S. St eel w as l ooki ng t o r epl ace H art el w i th s om eone w ho had9

sign ifi ca n t kn o w ledg e a n d ex p erien ce in the elec tr o n ics u sed at th e p lant. T h e re co rd pl ai nl ydemonstr at es thatM ul é had gr eat erel ectr oni cs know l edge a nd exper i ence than H arki ns . Forexampl e, unl i ke H arki ns , M ul é had be en a Sy s t ems R epai r m an, w or ked underthe s upervi s i on of H art el , and pas s ed the s y s t ems r epai rt es t . A l though H arki ns had t aken e l ectr oni cs cour s es thr ough U . S. St eel ’ s E l ectr i cal L earner ’ s Pr ogr am, he has never w or ked as a Sy s t ems R epai r m an, neverw or ked underthe s upervi s i on of H art el , and has neverpas s ed the s y s t ems r epai rt es t . T hus , des pi t e an a dm i r abl e i nves t m entof t i m e and eff or tt o l earn aboutel ectr i cal and el ectr oni cs i s s ues , H arki ns qual i fi cat i ons i n el ectr oni cs w e re n o t eq u a l to M u lé’ s. B e c a u se th e B L A sp e c if ies th a t se n io rityc o m e s in to p lay on ly w h e n th e a b ili ties o f

th e tw o e m p lo y e e s a re re lativ e lye q u a l, th e D istric t C o u rt c o rre c tly concl uded thata r eas onabl e j urycoul d notdeci de thatU . S. St eel vi ol at ed the B L A by aw ar di ng the bi d t o M ul é overH arki ns . I n l i ghtof thatconcl us i on, the D i s tr i ctC our tw as al s o r i ghti n s ay i ng thatther e w as no need t o addr es s w hetherU SW br eac hed i t s dutyof f a ir re p re se n tatio n to H a rk in s. T h e f a ilu re o n th e f

irst p a rt o f

H a rk in s’s h yb rid c laim is f a ta l to th e e n tir e ty o f

it. I I I . C oncl usi on W e w ill th e re f

o re a f f ir m th e ju d g m e n t o f

th e D is tr ic t C o u rt .