Opinion ID: 2576244
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Schaub's Claim Is a Federal Claim Arising Under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act.

Text: For cases involving private employers, claims that are founded directly on rights created by collective bargaining agreements and claims substantially dependent upon analysis of a collective-bargaining agreement are governed by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. [7] The parties agree that § 301 completely preempts any state law cause of action for breach of a collective bargaining agreement. [8] Schaub's wrongful termination claim is predicated upon a breach of the collective bargaining agreement and is therefore governed by § 301. K & L argues that Schaub's complaint does not state a cause of action under federal law and therefore does not state any claim upon which relief can be granted. But the fact that Schaub's pro se complaint does not mention a federal statute does not mean that it fails to state a federal claim. In Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams , the United States Supreme Court noted that suits brought under § 301 are subject to complete preemption and observed that once an area of state law has been completely pre-empted, any claim purportedly based on that pre-empted state law is considered, from its inception, a federal claim, and therefore arises under federal law. [9] Here, both parties agree that Schaub's claim is governed by § 301. Although Schaub's complaint does not specifically refer to § 301, we conclude that the complaint asserted a federal claim from its inception.