David Steckbeck v. Bartenders Union Local 165

709 F. App'x 463

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: January 17, 2018
• Docket: 16-16923
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM ****

In order to prevail, appellants must show that the union’s “conduct in dismissing their grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith.” Stevens v. Moore Business Forms, Inc., 18 F.3d 1443, 1447 (9th Cir. 1994). Such a decision by the union “is arbitrary only if it lacks a rational basis.” Id. Local 165’s decision not to investigate appellants’ grievance was rational because the grievance stemmed from facts Local 165 already knew. The union had an ample basis for assessing appellants’ grievance and simply chose not to “brood over it.” Peters v. Burlington N.R.R. Co., 931 F.2d 534, 540 (9th Cir. 1990), as amended on denial of reh’g (Apr. 23, 1991). Appellants have also not offered any evidence of bad faith on the part of Local 165. See Stevens, 18 F.3d at 1448.

AFFIRMED.

**** This diSpOS¡tion is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.