## Facts

- Diane Bredesen was employed as the “house contractor” for the Detroit Opera House, responsible for hiring “pick-up” orchestras for touring shows and acting as liaison between musicians, the conductor, and the theater.
- Bredesen was the only woman to hold the house-contractor position at any major Detroit-area venue and the first woman in Local No. 5’s history to hold that role.
- Detroit Federation of Musicians, Local No. 5 (the union) represented musicians and house contractors working under union agreements at multiple Detroit-area venues.
- At the time, there were three house contractors employed under union contracts in the Detroit metropolitan area: Bredesen at the Detroit Opera House, and two male house contractors at other venues.
- When Bredesen was hired, she asked the union president, Carl Austin, to negotiate “double scale” pay for her house-contractor work.
- Austin told Bredesen that all house contractors received a uniform “single scale” rate and that uniformity was necessary to prevent competition among venues; Bredesen accepted the single-scale rate based on that representation.
- Bredesen later learned that Austin’s statements were allegedly false and that the male house contractors at other venues were paid at the “double scale” rate under their union agreements.
- Bredesen sued the union asserting two claims: (1) breach of the federal duty of fair representation under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), and (2) sex discrimination under Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA), alleging the union negotiated her pay at half the rate negotiated for male house contractors.
- The union moved for judgment on the pleadings or, alternatively, summary judgment; the court addressed the motion under the summary-judgment standard.

## Issues

1. Whether Bredesen’s ELCRA sex-discrimination claim was preempted by § 301 of the LMRA because resolving it would require interpreting a collective bargaining agreement.
2. Whether Bredesen’s § 301 duty-of-fair-representation claim had to be dismissed because she did not exhaust available internal union remedies and did not show a basis to excuse exhaustion.

## Decision

- The court held that § 301 did not preempt Bredesen’s ELCRA sex-discrimination claim because the claim arose from a state-law duty not to discriminate and could be resolved without interpreting a collective bargaining agreement.
- The court dismissed Bredesen’s § 301 duty-of-fair-representation claim because she failed to pursue internal union procedures before filing suit and did not establish an exception excusing exhaustion.
- The union’s motion was granted in part and denied in part: the duty-of-fair-representation claim was dismissed, and the ELCRA claim remained for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- § 301 LMRA preemption applies when resolving a state-law claim is substantially dependent on interpreting a collective bargaining agreement; a claim is not preempted merely because a CBA is referenced as part of the facts.
- A state-law discrimination claim against a union may proceed where liability turns on alleged disparate treatment (for example, negotiating different wage rates based on sex) rather than on construing CBA terms.
- A plaintiff generally must exhaust reasonably available internal union remedies before bringing a federal duty-of-fair-representation claim under § 301.
- Exhaustion may be excused only if the plaintiff shows a recognized basis such as union hostility preventing a fair hearing, futility, inadequate internal relief, or undue delay in obtaining relief through union processes.

## Conclusion

Bredesen alleged that Local No. 5 induced her to accept single-scale pay by falsely claiming all house contractors were paid the same, while male house contractors received double scale, and that the pay disparity was sex-based. The court ruled her ELCRA discrimination claim was not § 301-preempted because it could be decided without interpreting a CBA, but it dismissed her federal duty-of-fair-representation claim because she did not use internal union remedies and did not show a valid reason to bypass them.


Bredesen v. Detroit Federation of Musicians, Local No. 5, 165 F. Supp. 2d 647 (2001)