Taylor

Taylor v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

Good Law
113 Cal. App. 4th 380·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1698·2003 Daily Journal DAR 12386·6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 358·20 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1107
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 2003B162846California2,493 words

Opinion

Opinion

Coffee, J.

Does an arbitration decision under a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) have preclusive effect in a civil suit for retaliatory discharge under Labor Code section 6310, subdivision (b)? We conclude it does not, unless (1) the CBA clearly and unmistakably provided for binding arbitration of the employee’s statutory claim under the Labor Code, and (2) the arbitration was conducted in a manner that allowed for a full litigation and fair adjudication of the Labor Code claim. In this case, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of an employer after determining that the employee’s claim under section 6310 was collaterally estopped by a labor arbitrator’s decision that the employee was terminated for good cause. This was error, because the CBA was never presented to the court and there was no evidence that it clearly and unmistakably provided for arbitration of the employee’s statutory claim. We reverse.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff and appellant Walter H. Taylor (Taylor) was employed by defendant and respondent Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) as a rocket engine mechanic. He was a member of the International Association of Machinists, Local No.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.