## Facts

- Charles V. Bowen, a U.S. Postal Service (USPS) employee, was discharged after an altercation with another employee.
- Under a collective-bargaining agreement, Bowen filed a grievance through his union.
- The union pursued the grievance initially but declined to take it to arbitration.
- Bowen filed a hybrid federal action against USPS for breach of the collective-bargaining agreement and against the union for breach of the duty of fair representation, seeking damages and injunctive relief.
- A jury found USPS discharged Bowen without just cause and found the union handled the grievance in an arbitrary manner.
- The district court entered judgment against both defendants and upheld the jury’s apportionment of damages between USPS and the union.
- The court of appeals affirmed USPS’s liability but reversed damages against the union, reasoning lost earnings were payable only by USPS.
- The Supreme Court granted review on the damages-apportionment question.

## Issues

1. In a hybrid wrongful discharge/duty of fair representation case, may a union be held liable for the portion of the employee’s damages caused by the union’s breach of the duty of fair representation?
2. Must damages be apportioned between employer and union according to the harm each caused when the employer’s breach causes initial injury and the union’s breach increases the loss?

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals’ refusal to impose damages on the union and remanded.
- The Court held that when an unlawful discharge causes initial damages and the union’s breach of the duty of fair representation increases those damages, liability must be apportioned between employer and union based on the harm attributable to each.
- The Court rejected a rule making the employer exclusively liable for all lost earnings merely because wages are paid by the employer.

## Legal Principles

- In a hybrid action where the employee proves (1) the employer violated the collective-bargaining agreement and (2) the union breached its duty of fair representation, damages are apportioned between employer and union according to the damages caused by the fault of each.
- The union may be primarily liable for the incremental harm its breach causes by impairing the grievance process (e.g., prolonging unemployment or delaying relief).
- Collective-bargaining relationships and grievance-arbitration mechanisms are governed by federal labor-law principles; common-law wage-liability concepts do not control damages allocation in hybrid cases.
- Apportionment serves the remedial goal of making the employee whole while assigning financial responsibility to each wrongdoer for the consequences it caused.

## Conclusion

The Court held that a union in a hybrid discharge/duty of fair representation case can be liable for the portion of the employee’s damages attributable to the union’s breach, and that damages must be allocated between employer and union according to their respective causal contributions to the employee’s loss.


Bowen v. U.S. Postal Serv., 459 U.S. 212 (1983)