Source: http://blake-uhlig.com/RepresentativeCases.aspx
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 03:19:08+00:00

Document:
Master Builders of Iowa, Inc. v. Polk County, 653 N.W.2d 382 (Iowa 2002).
In Master Builders of Iowa, a group of non-union contractors challenged the legality of a project labor agreement ("PLA"). Blake & Uhlig represented a trades council advocating for the use of a PLA. Ultimately, the issue reached the Supreme Court of Iowa. In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court found that the PLA was legal and enforceable. This case has had a lasting impact as it established the legality of PLA's under Iowa law.
In re Fluor Daniel, Inc., 333 NLRB 427 (2001), enforced, 332 F.3d 961 (6th Cir. 2003).
In Fluor Daniel, Inc., the employer systematically applied its hiring preferences and policies to screen out voluntary union organizers from consideration and mask their exclusion with the guise of legitimacy. Through Blake & Uhlig's representation of the organizers, the NLRB held that the employer unlawfully refused to consider and hire 120 voluntary union organizers, and granted the organizers significant remedies, including compensation for loss of pay and benefits suffered as a result of the employer's anti-union discrimination. In the end, this case was settled for $12 million in backpay and interest paid to the organizers by the employer.
IBEW, Local Union 545 v. Hope Electrical Corp., 380 F.3d 1084 (8th Cir. 2004).
In Hope Electrical Corp., Blake & Uhlig represented the union which brought suit to enforce arbitration awards against an employer, as well as its alter egos – the owner and related companies. After a favorable decision by the district court, the Eighth Circuit upheld the district court's enforcement of the awards and also upheld the district court's default judgment entered against the owner and related companies as a sanction for failure to comply with a discovery order.
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, Local 245 v. Kansas City Piggy Back, doing business as Terminal Consolidation Company, 88 F.3d 659 (8th Cir. 1996).
In Kansas City Piggy Back, after the union received a favorable arbitration decision, it sued to enforce the award. Through our representation, the union succeeded on the district court level and appellate level. The Eighth Circuit upheld the Western District of Missouri's decision to apply state contract law for timeliness of a suit to enforce an arbitration award. This case established significant Eighth Circuit precedent for determining the appropriate statute of limitations for suits to enforce or vacate arbitration awards.
Anthony Lewis v. UFCW Local 2, 243 Fed.Appx. 445 (10th Cir. 2007).
In Lewis, a former union member sued the union for not submitting a grievance to arbitration. The member claimed that the union violated its duty of fair representation. In representing the union, we successfully argued for dismissal of the suit and such dismissal was upheld on appeal.
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers, and Helpers, AFL-CIO (Kaiser Cement Corporation) and James Gilbert, 312 NLRB 218 (1993) and Gilbert v. National Labor Relations Board, 56 F.3d 1438 (D.C. Cir. 1995).
In Gilbert, the NLRB upheld the decision of an administrative law judge, who ruled that the Union did not unlawfully threaten to cause the employer to discharge four members under the union-security clause if they discontinued paying membership dues. The Board's decision was appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court. Blake & Uhlig successfully advocated for the union as the Court upheld the Board's decision in an arguable departure from precedent.
Int'l Broth. of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, AFL-CIO v. Local Lodge D504, 866 F.2d 641 (3d Cir. 1989).
In Local Lodge D504, the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers brought suit against six disaffiliated local unions after they refused to turn over their books, records, properties, funds, and assets. Through our representation, the Boilermakers received a favorable ruling from the district court which was later upheld by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
Croft Metals, 348 NLRB 717 (2006).
Blake & Uhlig represented the union in Croft Metals, one of the companion cases to the NLRB's noteworthy Oakwood Healthcare case. Unlike the Oakwood Healthcare decision, the Board found that lead persons in Croft Metals did not exercise supervisory authority under Section 2(11) of the Act, and therefore were not supervisors. The Croft Metals decision continues to be cited for supporting the inclusion of lead persons in bargaining units.
©2019 Blake & Uhlig, P.A. All rights reserved.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.