UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA



Similar documents
COMPLAINT. Now come Plaintiffs, personal care attendants, consumers, surrogates,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND. Plaintiff

CAUSE NO. PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION. Greg Abbott, and complains of OLD UNITED LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY ( Defendant ), and I.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORIGIA-~~T ~:J,-~T,>cURT SAVANNAH DIVISION j Ga. NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

Securities Whistleblower Incentives and Protection

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Bryana Bible, SECOND AMENDED CLASS Plaintiff, Court File No. 12-cv RHK-JSM INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 05/19/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 6:13-cv LRR Document 147 Filed 02/04/15 Page 1 of 9

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Windmill Inns of America, d/b/a Windmill Inn of Ashland, Defendant.

Case 3:14-cv Document 1 Filed 06/28/14 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO : : : : : : : : : : : :

cv UHL

Case 2:12-cv GMN-GWF Document 1 Filed 11/09/12 Page 1 of 7

COMPLAINT PARTIES. 2. COGA promotes the expansion of oil and gas supplies, markets, and transportation infrastructure.

Broadband Graphics - infringement of Patent Law and Procedure

Pursuant to A.R.S , et seq., plaintiffs allege:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION

Case 2:15-cv JNP Document 2 Filed 09/08/15 Page 1 of 10

The State of New Jersey, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, TAMPA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA AMENDED COMPLAINT I. INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT I.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT JUDGMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA BROWARD DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No.: COMPLAINT

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. against LEAD CONCEPTS, INC. and CHRISTOPHER WEIR (collectively referred to as

Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia Policy Statement Effective date: 12/14/2000 Page 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 3:10-cv JAP -DEA Document 1 Filed 08/11/10 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 1

Case: 3:14-cv bbc Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. Plaintiff DIVISION "D" JUDGE McNAMARA v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

We, the Student Body, of the University of South Florida, in order to provide effective

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE DIRECTIVE /6/04 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION. States Constitution and 42 U.S.C against the State of New Jersey, New Jersey s

Case 3:16-cv Document 2-1 Filed 06/22/16 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA COMPLAINT

Case 2:07-cv LED Document 1-1 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 1 of 5

Case 1:10-cv Document 1 Filed 05/24/10 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 10/21/15 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS KANSAS CITY-LEAVENWORTH DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. Case No.

Case 1:14-cv JEB Document 17 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

CASE 0:99-md PAM Document 490 Filed 06/27/05 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 1:14-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 05/13/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

APPENDIX A IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Plaintiffs, -against- IAS Part 5 Justice Kathryn E. Freed. WHEREAS Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General of the State of New York

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY. No.

AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Subtitle B Increasing Regulatory Enforcement and Remedies

Schneps, Leila; Colmez, Coralie. Math on Trial : How Numbers Get Used and Abused in the Courtroom. New York, NY, USA: Basic Books, p i.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA HARRISONBURG DIVISION EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION CONSENT DECREE. WHEREAS: Plaintiff, the United States of America, has

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA NORFOLK DIVISION 2Dub APR - 3 PI: 41 COMPLAINT

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS AND JEFF SCHMIDT

Case 1:09-cv Document 1 Filed 12/10/09 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

No. Plaintiff Kelvin Bledsoe ( Plaintiff ), by his undersigned counsel, brings claims

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 5:09-cv TJC-JRK Document 30 Filed 02/16/10 Page 1 of 5. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Ocala Division

DEFENDANT ATTORNEY GENERAL S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO DISMISS

Case 6:13 cv Document 1 Filed 10/03/13 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT. Also cited NLRA or the Act; 29 U.S.C [Title 29, Chapter 7, Subchapter II, United States Code]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case 3:14-cv H-JMA Document 1 Filed 03/24/14 Page 1 of 11. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No.

Case 6:14-cv WSS Document 1-24 Filed 01/13/14 Page 1 of 35 EXHIBIT F

SALES REPRESENTATIVE AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

ATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES

Case bjh11 Doc 31 Filed 12/07/10 Entered 12/07/10 18:18:45 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Civil No (JRT/HB) INTRODUCTION

BYLAWS of the Palmetto State School Counselor Association (PSSCA)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY. Plaintiffs, Defendant.

THIS AGREEMENT SHURTECH BRANDS, LLC

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING

Case 1:14-cv ERK-JMA Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 6 CIVIL COVER SHEET (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.

Case: 1:13-cv SSB-SKB Doc #: 9 Filed: 03/11/14 Page: 1 of 5 PAGEID #: 31

Case 4:11-cv Document 1 Filed 10/12/11 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:05-cv AKH Document 58 Filed 09/22/06 Page 1 of 6

AN ACT IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

CIVIL DICTRICT COURT PARISH OF ORLEANS STATE OF LOUISIANA

Transcription:

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 Eric G. Moskowitz Assistant General Counsel Abby Propis Simms Deputy Assistant General Counsel Laura Bandini, Senior Attorney Mark G. Eskenazi, Attorney National Labor Relations Board Special Litigation Branch 1 th Street, N.W., Suite 00 Washington, DC 00 Tel: (0-1/Fax: (0-1 eric.moskowitz@nlrb.gov Attorneys for the National Labor Relations Board UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF ARIZONA, Defendant. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT I. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment under U.S.C. 01 and 0 that Arizona Constitution Article ( Article, attached hereto as Exhibit A, conflicts with the rights of private sector employees under the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, U.S.C. et seq. ( NLRA and is therefore preempted. 1

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 II. Article is preempted by operation of the NLRA and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause because it prohibits alternative routes to union representation that are authorized and protected by the NLRA. III. This Court has jurisdiction under U.S.C. and 1. This action arises under the NLRA and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause. IV. Venue is proper under U.S.C. 1 because the Defendant resides in this judicial district. V. Plaintiff National Labor Relations Board is an independent agency of the United States, created by Congress in and charged with the administration of the NLRA. U.S.C. 1. VI. Defendant State of Arizona is one of the fifty states of the United States. VII. On November, 0, the voters of Arizona approved Article, entitled Right to secret ballot; employee representation, which is now in effect. Article states [t]he right to vote by secret ballot for employee representation is fundamental and shall be guaranteed where local, state or federal law permits or requires elections, designations or authorizations for employee representation. VIII. Article applies to private employees, employers, and labor organizations also subject to the NLRA.

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 IX. Section of the NLRA, U.S.C. 1, provides in part that Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities. X. Section (a of the NLRA, U.S.C. (a, states in part that Representatives designated or selected for the purposes of collective bargaining by the majority of the employees in a unit appropriate for such purposes, shall be the exclusive representatives of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, or other conditions of employment. Section (c of the NLRA, U.S.C. (c, provides in part, in circumstances where employees or employers file a representation petition and a question of representation exists, [the Board] shall direct an election by secret ballot and shall certify the results thereof. XI. Section (f of the NLRA, U.S.C. (f, states in part that It shall not be an unfair labor practice... for an employer engaged primarily in the building and construction industry to make an agreement... with a labor organization of which building and construction employees are members... because [] the majority status of such labor organization has not been established under the provisions of section of this title prior to the making of such agreement.... XII. The NLRA permits but does not require secret ballot elections for the designation, selection, or authorization of a collective bargaining representative where, for example, employees successfully petition their employer to voluntarily recognize their designated representative on the basis of reliable evidence of majority support, in

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 accordance with Sections and of the NLRA, U.S.C. 1 and, or where a construction union seeks recognition from a construction employer in accordance with Section (f of the NLRA, U.S.C. (f. XIII. Because Article of Arizona s constitution provides that a secret ballot election is guaranteed wherever federal law permits or requires elections (emphasis supplied, Article requires elections where federal law does not and thereby deprives private sector employees of their right to pursue the other options permitted by federal law to designate, select, or authorize representatives of their own choosing and to secure their employers voluntary recognition of such representatives. XIV. Article of Arizona s constitution creates an actual conflict with private sector employees' NLRA Section right to representatives of their own choosing. The Amendment is therefore preempted by operation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. XV. In addition, even if it were fairly possible to construe Arizona State Constitution Article as only supporting the NLRA s guarantee of a secret ballot election if the voluntary recognition option is not chosen, Article is preempted insofar as it creates a parallel state enforcement mechanism for protecting employee representation rights that Congress assigned to the National Labor Relations Board. See U.S.C. 1, ; U.S. Const. Art. VI, cl..

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court: 1. To issue a declaration that Arizona State Constitution Article, to the extent that it applies to private employees, employers, and labor organizations subject to the National Labor Relations Act ( U.S.C. et seq., is preempted by operation of the National Labor Relations Act and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause ; and. To grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper. 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 Dated: May, 0 Respectfully submitted, /s/eric G. Moskowitz Eric G. Moskowitz Assistant General Counsel National Labor Relations Board Special Litigation Branch 1th Street, NW Washington, DC 00 Tel: (0-1 Fax: (0-1 Eric.Moskowitz@nlrb.gov Abby Propis Simms Deputy Assistant General Counsel Tel: (0 - Abby.Simms@nlrb.gov Laura Bandini Senior Attorney Tel: (0 - Laura.Bandini@nlrb.gov Mark G. Eskenazi Attorney Tel: (0 - Mark.Eskenazi@nlrb.gov