A New Day Dawning or Dark Clouds on the Horizon? the Potential Impact of the Pyett Case

By Winograd, Barry | Labor Law Journal, Fall 2008 | Go to article overview

A New Day Dawning or Dark Clouds on the Horizon? the Potential Impact of the Pyett Case


Winograd, Barry, Labor Law Journal


More than three decades after the Supreme Court's decision in Alexander v. GardnerDenver1 erected a solid barrier between labor arbitration and the litigation of individual statutory discrimination claims by unionized workers, the justices will consider a case that effectively asks them to tear down that wall. The pending case, 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett,2 has important implications in the field of labor and employment law, and for those who practice in the area.

I .The Pyett Case

In Summer 2003, three night security employees in a large New York City office building found themselves in new positions after the owner, the Pennsylvania Building Company, retained a new security subcontractor for some of the duties previously handled by the incumbent contractor. The new company, a non-union entity, was affiliated with the incumbent contractor, a unionized business. As part of the new arrangement, the employer reassigned the employees to different non-security positions as night porters and light duty cleaners. The workers, all over 50 years old and with decades of seniority, found that their new jobs were more physically demanding and less financially rewarding. They were not pleased, and looked to the union to address their grievances.

The three employees affected by the change were subject to a multi-employer collective bargaining agreement (CBA) negotiated by Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) with the real estate industry in New York City. The union is the longtime representative of building service workers - custodians, doormen, watchmen, and others - along the east coast.

Following the employee protest, a grievance was filed under the CBA. The grievance alleged that the CBA was violated by an improper transfer and reassignment arising from the new subcontract, and, subsequently, by the company's denial of a handyman assignment, resulting in a loss of pay and overtime. The grievance alleged as well that the workers were the victims of age discrimination.

Soon after the CBA arbitration began in February 2004, and be- fore it ended a year later, the union had second thoughts about the scope of its case. According to the plaintiffs, the union advised them that their transfer and discrimination claims would not be advanced by the union in the CBA arbitration because the union had approved the new arrangement. Instead, only the handyman assignment and overtime issues would be pursued by the union. The workers were informed that their other claims could be presented individually before the CBA arbitrator, by their private counsel, and they (the workers) would pay arbitration fees separate from those incurred by the union and management. The employees rejected the offer and moved forward with administrative filings and litigation in September 2004, alleging age discrimination under federal, state, and city law. Eventually, the labor arbitrator rejected the CBA issues pressed by the union regarding the handyman assignment and overtime.

Facing litigation after its success in arbitration, the company moved to dismiss the litigation or, alternatively, to compel arbitration. In moving to compel, the company contended that the CBA's arbitration provision provided the exclusive means to redress the individual discrimination claims presented by the workers, and that the employer had provided substantial monetary benefits for the unionized workforce in the negotiations leading to the provision. The relevant portion of the CBA states:

There shall be no discrimination against any present or future employee by reason of race, creed, color, age, disability, national origin, sex, union membership, or any characteristic protected by law, including, but not limited to, claims made pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimina- tion in Employment Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Code, New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, Connecticut Fair Employer practices Act, or any other similar laws, rules or regulations. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • A full archive of books and articles related to this one
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A New Day Dawning or Dark Clouds on the Horizon? the Potential Impact of the Pyett Case
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

    Already a member? Log in now.