Pinelli

MEMORANDUM *

Because appellant Pinelli’s complaint does not allege discrimination in Safeway’s employment action — demotion to a lower-paying job necessitated by a back injury — the district court properly dismissed her California state law claim against Safeway and her union for disability discrimination. Pinelli was transferred to a lower-paying position as a booth clerk (“general merchandise clerk” or “GM”) after a back-injury rendered her unable to perform the higher-paying work (“journeyman food clerk” or “JF”) for the full túne of her shifts. Pinelli does not challenge her transfer, but alleges that some GM clerks in other Safeways are paid at the higher JF wages. This is a claim shared by all general merchandise clerks in Pinelli’s store, and cannot be rationally tied to discrimination on the basis of disability. She is being discriminated against, if at all, because she works in the Santa Rosa Safeway store, not because of any disability.

The district court also correctly concluded that the first amended complaint did not state a claim of breach of the collective bargaining agreement because this claim is preempted under § 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act.…