International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 302 v. Marathon Petroleum Company LP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF Case No. 22-cv-09059-AGT

ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL 302,

Plaintiff, ORDER ON MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v. Re: Dkt. No. 24

MARATHON PETROLEUM COMPANY

LP, et al., Defendants.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 302, has moved for sum- mary judgment on its only claim, which seeks to compel the defendants to arbitrate a dispute over whether certain work being performed at the defendants’ petroleum refinery is “Covered Work” under the terms of the parties’ project labor agreement (PLA). It is undisputed that the PLA is a type of collective-bargaining agreement. Whether the PLA requires the parties to arbitrate their dispute is therefore “an issue for judicial determina- tion.” AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Commc’ns Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643, 649 (1986). “[P]ublic policy favors the resolution of labor disputes through arbitration.” Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Phoenix Mailers Union Loc. 752, Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 989 F.2d 1077, 1080 (9th Cir. 1993). Courts have thus applied “a strong presumption in favor of arbitrability.” Id. Reflecting this…