Alaska Employment Law

Robert Burnside and 270 other unionized employees sued Kiewit Pacific under California state law for pay for time spent travelling between designated meeting sites and job sites.  Kiewit claimed that the collective bargaining agreement preempted such claims, and left Burnside’s class with only federal claims under the CBA.

Kiewit removed to federal court.  When Burnside moved to remand, the federal judge found § 301 preemption, and denied the motion.  The court then granted Kiewit’s summary judgment motion, holding that Burnside a) had failed to exhaust grievance remedies under the CBA; and b) had failed to file suit within the § 301 limitations period, 6 months.

On appeal, the 9th Circuit reversed, finding no § 301 preemption.  The court held: a) Burnside’s claim arose under state wage law; and b) the trial court would not need to interpret the CBA in order to resolve the state law claim.   Burnside v. Kiewit Pacific Corp., 2007 WL 1760747 (9th Cir. June 20, 2007).