Silver Jackson v. United Industrial Workers of Seafares International Union AFL-CIO

• Court: Superior Court of The Virgin Islands
• Decided: February 18, 2020
• Docket: SX-14-CV-92
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST CROIX

SILVER JACKSON,

PLAINTIFF, SX 14 CV 092 v ACTION FOR DAMAGES FAILURE UNITED INDL'STRIAL WORKERS 0F SEAFARFs T0 REPRESENT INTERNATIONAL UNION AFL C10

DEFENDANT

ORDER

trial Workers of THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant United Indus ment filed on May 18 Seafares International Union AFL C10 3 Motion tor Summary Judg 2017 In accordance with 2016 The PlaintiffSilver Jackson filed an Opposition on March 1

the Memorandum Opinion of even date it is hereby International Union ORDERED that Defendant United Industrial Workers of Seatares

AFL C10 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED It is further

ORDERED that this matter is CLOSED It is further d on all parties ORDERED that this Order and the ermdum Opinion be serve

DONE and so ORDERED this L8 day of February 2020

my / Tamara C I" MM H OLD W WILLOCKS Clerk oft /’ c A r fl esiding Judge of the Superior Court

By 1/] , A [11/ ou " e” 1' ’ ’

Dated /1 3/1.! ISLANDS SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN DIVISION OF ST CROIX

PLAINTIFF, SX 14 CV 092 V ACTION FOR DAMAGES FAILURE Es TO REPRESENT UNITED INDLSTRIAL WORKERS 0F SEAFAR INTERNATIONAL UNION AFL C10 Cited as 2020 VI SUPER 028 U DEFENDANT

Appearances

Eszart A Wynter, Sr , Esq Law Office of Eszart A Wynter Sr P C St Croix USVI For the Plamtzjf

John J Merchant, Esq United Industrial Workers ofthe Seatares St CroiX USVI For the Defendant

MEMORANDUM OPINION

WILLOCKS Presiding Judge ndant United Industrial Workers of THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defe ment einafter Union ) Motion for Summary Judg Seafares International Union AFL C10 (her tiff Silver Jackson (hereinafter (hereinafier Motion ) filed on May 18 2016 The Plain

sition ) on March I 2017 Plaintiff ) filed an Opposition (hereinafter Oppo

BACKGROUND

the Plaintiff began working for the According to the Complaint on October 6 2006 ernment ) with the Department of Human Government of the Virgin Islands (hereinafter Gov tionship between the Services (hereinafier DHS ) (Compl if 6 ) Sometime later the rela

As a result on December 19 2011 the Plaintiff Plaintiffand her employer began to deteriorate

ended for one week (Id {I 24 ) The Union as was informed that her employment would be susp Silwr Jackson \ l nion 2020 \l SUN—ROB U SX 14 CV 092 MEMORANDUM OPINION Page 2 ol 6

rnment employees including the Plaintiff the exclusive bargaining representative for all Gove the tiffs termination (Id 1i 10 ) On June 1 2012 filed ademand for arbitration due to the Plain

n had been withdrawn without (Id T 10) Plaintiff learned that the demand for arbitratio laint alleging that the Union breached the Consequently the Plaintiff filed the present Comp under the Collective Bargaining Agreement contract and its duty of fair representation

(hereinafter CBA )between the parties

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Virgin Islands Rule ofCivil Procedure $17 Motions for summary judgment are governed by

ted ifthe movant shows that there is no 56 I A motion for summary judgment shall be gran nt is entitled to judgment as a matter of genuine dispute as to any material fact and the mova t the outcome of the suit under the law As to materiality only those facts that might affec

ary judgment 3 governing law will properly preclude the entry of summ out to the court that there is no HS ‘The moving party bears the initial burden of pointing an absence of evidence to support the genuine issue of material fact #or in other words has the burden of setti ng out specific nonmoving party 5 case 4 The non moving party then consider the cited materials and other facts showing a genuine issue for trial 5 The court may ence or determine the credi bility materials in the record 6 But the court may not weigh the evid ence in the light most favo rable to the of witnesses 7 The Court must consider the record evid fthat the evidence in the summary judgment non moving party 8 The court must satisfy itsel

/ ‘ V l R Cit P 56 ent VI Li-XlS >71 >75 (VI 2018)( A summary judgm V1 R Ci» P 36(3) see Rymer \ [\maII(orp 68 a triahle issue of ant can demonstrate the absence ot mm ant is entitled to judgment as a matter ot law it the mo» see n 60 V l 768 794 (V l 2014) (citations omitted) material tact in the record ) see also it alters \ ”whe s ed) also ”aim“ Martin 34 V1 ’79 387 t2010)(citation omitt Rymer 68 V I lLXlS >75 2008) [citations omitted) 4 Williams t [Hired Corp 50 V l 191 194 (V l 5 Rymu 68 V I LEXl S D73 76 6 VI R (,i\ P >6(c)(3) 7 See It ill/arm 30 V I at 194 93 R Rymer 68 V I lFXIS 576 Silye/ lac/cw)!“ (man 2020\lSl IIROZSL SX 14 CV 092 MEMORANDUM OPINION Page a 01 6

should only grant record supports this relief 9 Summarvjudgment is a drastic remedy a court materials on file and summary judgment when the pleadings the discovery and disclosure

any affidavits show there is no genuine issue as to any material fact ‘0 (Count I) and In the Complaint the Plaintiff alleges hybrid claims breach of contract held that in order to breach of fair representation The Supreme Court ofthe Virgin Islands has elements for both a succeed under hybrid claims the plaintiff/employer must establish all the

breach of contract and breach of duty of fair representation 1' DISCUSSION

A Breach of Contract of the The Union claims that summary judgment is appropriate because its withdrawal the Union as the Plaintiff‘s grievance did not constitute a breach of contract According to to decide exclusive bargaining representative of DHS employees it has the broad discretion However the Plaintiff how to pursue an employee 5 grievance against an employer (Mot at 3 ) Plaintiff s grievance contends that although the Union acknowledges that it abandoned the failure to contact claims there are still genuine issues of material fact as to whether the Union

the Plaintiff prior to settling her grievance constitutes a breach of contract was an To succeed on a breach of contract claim a plaintiff must Show that (I) there as a breach of that duty and agreement (2) a duty yy as created by that agreement (3) there w

(4) damages resulted '

1lan/upoolt (1m loft/re I I 63 VI 36) 383 (VI 2013) ‘0 Scc Rymer ()8 V l l I XIS 575 see also Harlin 54 V1 at 386 V l l EXIS 200 at *7 (Super ll JOchh 34 V l 416:: Sec (nisar \ lmerlcan l-echa/rrm ofTeachers 2016 bland: 882F2d 733 737(JCI Cir 1989)( [A]n (t V1 Dcc : 2016)(citing (low I (miernmcmoflirgin must bring both a claim against the public cmploy er tor breach employ cc proceeding under 24 V l ( § 361 383 for breach of fair reprcsentation simultaneously The cmploy ee may it of contract and a claim against the union the same \t hethcr he sues onc thc he chooses sue one defendant and not the other but the case hc must proye is othcr or both ) DL/ Wong (api/u/ Inc 67 ‘ Phl/llp‘ Walsh Monsanto 6()\ l 612 6210 l 2017)(citing BIOIli/laldI V1788 7980120131 Silver Jackson \ ( man 5X 14 CV 092 2020 V1 SUPl-R 028 U MEMORANDUM OPIMON Page 6 016

in determining whether to pursue an employee 5 grievance deciding not to continue with a

grievance does not limit one s procedural right when the Union has reasonable basis Here it is

evident that the Union 5 decision was reasonable given the evidence it obtained during

discovery Moreover the Union failure to inform the Plaintiff personally does not constitute

bad faith as a mere oversight does not rise to a level of unreasonableness to constitute a breach

of fair representation Thus the Plaintiff has failed to establish that the Union 5 decision was

arbitrary or done in bad faith Therefore there is no genuine issue as to any material tact

regarding part two of Plaintiffs hybrid claim As a result summary judgment in favor oi the

Union is appropriate as it has established that there are no genuine issues as to any material

facts regarding both hybrid claims

CONCLUSION

Having determined that summary judgment is appropriate as to both the claim ofbreach

ofcontract and breach of fair representation summary judgment will be granted in favor ofthe

Union Consequently the Plaintiffs Complaint shall be dismissed An order consistent with

this memorandum opinion shall follow

DONE and so ORDERED this Ed” of February 2020

ATTEST WM 7&1 %M Tamara Charles HAROLD W L WILLOCKS Clerk ofthe Court Presiding Judge of the Superior Court

By Court Clerk Supervisor

Dated