United Transportation Union v. Southern California Rapid Transit District

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 802·7 Cal. App. 4th 804·9 Cal. Rptr. 2d 702·92 Daily Journal DAR 8626·143 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2050
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 23, 1992B058211California3,997 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

In this appeal we are asked to determine whether a controversy which arose between a labor organization and an employer concerning one of its employees is subject to arbitration pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between the parties. The controversy centers around the rights of a part-time employee who took a pregnancy leave of absence. The specific provisions in the parties’ collective bargaining agreement regarding leaves of absence apply only to full-time employees and the question presented here is whether certain other language in the agreement, more general in nature, can be construed to give leave of absence protection to the employee. The employer refused to send the issue to arbitration, contending the arbitration clause in the agreement does not cover it. The trial court agreed. However, we conclude that the dispute between the parties is indeed subject to arbitration and we reverse the order of the trial court which denied the labor organization’s petition to compel arbitration.

Factual Background

Cyndi Ortega (Ortega) was employed by the Southern California Rapid Transit District (the District) as a part-time bus operator and was represented by…

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.