Opinion ID: 48714
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Boorstein’s Claim

Text: On appeal, Continental argues that Boorstein’s claim is not viable because of her failure to exhaust her non-judicial remedies under the CBA. We agree. 14 Id. 12 It is undisputed that Boorstein not only failed to file a grievance regarding the unfavorable adjustment of her noncompetitive seniority, but, despite receiving notice of her right to do so, she failed to request review and correction of any adjustment within the thirty-day period made available to all flight attendants by the Board’s award, all in derogation of the CBA. Boorstein does not offer, and our own review fails to reveal, any reason why her failure to pursue the appropriate remedies under the CBA should be excused. In addition, the Board was not required to provide Boorstein with personal notice of the February 2002 hearing. As a flight attendant and thus a subscriber to the CBA, Boorstein had authorized the IAM to act exclusively on her behalf. Thus, as the district court correctly recognized, notice to the IAM —— Boorstein’s representative —— constituted adequate notice to Boorstein and all similarly-situated employees who had not filed individual grievances.15 We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Boorstein’s claims.