Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. v. Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 20233:22-cv-05113California615 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

facts of the case and the relevant law. SEIU argues that only it, and not Kaiser, can initiate a grievance under the Grievance and Arbitration Procedures outlined in the Collective Bargaining Agreements at issue. For support, SEIU points to the “Steps of the Grievance…Procedure,” which contemplate that the procedure “shall be initiated at Step One by the submittal of a grievance form from the union.” Dkt. No. 1 at 148; see also id. at 518 (similarly contemplating that “[a] Union Steward representing an employee shall initiate the grievance procedure at Step One.”). This means, according to SEIU, that Kaiser’s claims seeking an order compelling arbitration must be dismissed. On this record, however, the best that can be said for SEIU is that the agreements are ambiguous. While the steps of the grievance procedure suggest that only the union can initiate the procedure, the agreements contain other language suggesting that the parties agreed to arbitrate all disputes, regardless of which side initiates them. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 1 at 146 (defining “[g]rievance” as “every dispute concerning interpretation and application of this Agreement and/or any dispute concerning wages, hours, or…

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.