CARLISLE v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.

[cheryl]

CARLISLE v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. - Leagle

ROBERT W. CARLISLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., TEAMSTERS LOCAL 687, AN AFFILIATE OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, Defendants-Appellees.

Plaintiff-appellant Robert W. Carlisle ("Carlisle") appeals from an order of the District Court granting separate motions for summary judgment filed by defendants-appellees United Parcel Service and Teamsters Local 687 ("UPS" and "the Union," respectively). Carlisle brought suit on November 8, 2015, alleging that the Union breached its duty of fair representation under the Labor Management Relations Act § 301, 29 U.S.C. § 185, and that UPS breached the collective bargaining agreement between the Union and UPS by terminating his employment (together, the "Hybrid § 301" action). On appeal, Carlisle argues that the District Court improperly resolved genuine issues of material fact against him when it granted defendants' motions for summary judgment. We assume the parties' familiarity with the facts, the underlying procedural history, and the issues on appeal.

CONCLUSION

We have considered all of Carlisle's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

CARLISLE v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. - Leagle

Additional details here <-------Hey bbsam, Click there on here

.
.
.
​

 

[trickpony1]

...and does anyone not understand why we have been, and always will be, represented by a union?

In the "make believe" world of collective bargaining and organized labor a "breach of contract" issue is just a "wisp in the wind"...only to disappear when the wind changes directions.

In the real world a "breach of contract" lawsuit can bring millions of dollars to the affected person and, yes, I saw it years ago in another state. The person (not UPS related) is quite wealthy now.

Over the years I have seen real, worthy cases of wrong doing by the company swept under the table and "gone with the wind". Too many cases, in fact, to attribute it to anything other than collusion, weak representation and extortion.

We will always be "union". The company doesn't intend to bust the union. The union is the company's "safety cushion".

...and, yes, I understand what representation we do have is better than nothing.

 

[browned out]

CARLISLE v. UNITED PARCEL | No. 7:15-CV-1376 ... | 20170830c13| Leagle.com

 

[Inthegame]

Too many cases, in fact, to attribute it to anything other than collusion, weak representation and extortion.

So a guy is pissed off cause he can't manage to stay employed, so he blames everyone but himself for his fate, and you reached a conclusion of extortion and collusion?
Wow.