• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Fifth Circuit Affirms District Court Order to Compel Arbitration Under Albemarle’s CBA

0
by Jeremy Clare

Thursday, Dec 27, 2012


Tweet

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order to compel arbitration finding that it was the arbitrator’s task to evaluate the scope of the grievance and the CBA.

Background

In International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 716, AFL-CIO v. Albemarle Corporation, Inc., No. 11-20883 (5th Cir. June 18, 2012) the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (“Union”) filed a grievance against Albemarle Corporation (“Albemarle”), a company that manufactures specialty chemicals and operates a chemical plant in Pasadena, Texas. Both are parties to a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”), and pursuant to that CBA, the Union filed a grievance known as Grievance 10-02. The grievance was denied at all stages of internal review. The CBA allowed for arbitration in limited circumstances, but Albemarle refused to arbitrate the grievance. The Union sued Albemarle to compel arbitration.

The Union claimed that Albemarle’s refusal to submit the grievance to arbitration violated the CBA. Albemarle argued that the Union was attempting to arbitrate issues outside the scope of Grievance 10-02 by recharacterizing the subject matter of the grievance. The district court agreed with the Union and granted summary judgment in its favor.

Fifth Circuit

According to the Court, it was undisputed that the CBA allowed the Union to raise Grievance 10-02 and that the CBA thus entitled the Union to arbitration of that grievance. The particular issue was whether Grievance 10-02 encompasses the claims on which the Union sought to compel arbitration. The Court addressed whether that was a question for the court or the arbitrator to decide.

The Court reviewed the CBA to determine the scope of the parties’ agreement. The CBA entitle the Union to arbitrate “grievances,” which included any dispute between the parties involving the proper application of, interpretation of, or compliance with the CBA. However, the CBA does not extend the right to arbitration to “complaints,” which involve claims that do not allege violations of the CBA. Furthermore, the CBA prohibited the parties from attempting to arbitrate a complaint by disguising it as a grievance.

The Court explained that the CBA required the Union to meet certain procedural requirements before it could arbitrate a claim. It was undisputed that the Union met those procedural requirements to arbitrate. The CBA left the questions of proper application of or compliance with the CBA to the arbitrator. Furthermore, questions of falsely citing contract violations merely for the purpose of elevating a complaint to grievance status is also a question left to the arbitrator.

The Court concluded that the Union’s right to arbitration was limited to the scope of Grievance 10-02 and that the Union’s complaint was limited to Grievance 10-02. The arbitrator need not consider issues outside the scope of Grievance 10-02. Thus, the district court did not err in ordering Albemarle to arbitrate Grievance 10-02. The Court affirmed.

Related Posts

  • Fifth Circuit Affirms Arbitration Decision on Collective Bargaining AgreementFifth Circuit Affirms Arbitration Decision on Collective Bargaining Agreement
  • Fifth Circuit Upholds: UPS Union Members Can Bring Title VII Claims in a Federal Judicial ForumFifth Circuit Upholds: UPS Union Members Can Bring Title VII Claims in a Federal Judicial Forum
  • Fifth Circuit Rules on Arbitrability of Labor Union Grievances Under the CBA  Fifth Circuit Rules on Arbitrability of Labor Union Grievances Under the CBA
  • Fifth Circuit Reverses Arbitrator’s Ruling in Southwest Airlines Labor DisputeFifth Circuit Reverses Arbitrator’s Ruling in Southwest Airlines Labor Dispute
  • Fifth Circuit Holds Court Must Decide Issue of Arbitrability in Labor Contract DisputeFifth Circuit Holds Court Must Decide Issue of Arbitrability in Labor Contract Dispute
  • Fifth Circuit Holds Policy Exclusion Applies Where Arbitrator Relied on Express Warranty in Texas Construction Defect CaseFifth Circuit Holds Policy Exclusion Applies Where Arbitrator Relied on Express Warranty in Texas Construction Defect Case

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Jeremy Clare

Jeremy Clare is a law clerk at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert. Jeremy received his J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 2012 and received a B.A. from the University of South Carolina where he studied political science.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy