May 31 — The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an
appeal filed by a union representing workers at the Trump Taj Mahal in New
Jersey who alleged that the casino's bankrupt operators unlawfully rejected
obligations that arose from an expired labor contract ( UNITE HERE Local 54 v.
Trump Entm't Resorts, Inc., U.S., No. 15-1286, cert. denied 5/31/16 ).
By denying review, the justices let stand a U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit ruling of first impression that the federal
bankruptcy code permits Chapter 11 debtor-employers such as Trump Entertainment
Resorts Inc. and related companies to reject or modify employee benefits
established in a collective bargaining agreement even after the agreement has
expired (810 F.3d 161, 205 LRRM 3201 (3d Cir. 2016)) (10 DLR AA-1, 1/15/16).
In its petition for high court review, UNITE HERE Local
54 argued that Section 1113 of the bankruptcy code provides for only court-approved
rejection of a contractual bargaining agreement. It doesn't apply to statutory
duties under the National Labor Relations Act to keep some employment terms and
conditions in effect pending negotiations, the union said.
Trump Entertainment contended, among other things, that
the case doesn't warrant review because no circuit split exists on the issue
and the Third Circuit's ruling doesn't conflict with high court precedent.
Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential
nominee, no longer owns Trump Taj Mahal and its adjacent hotel or the
entertainment company. Trump Entertainment is now a subsidiary of billionaire
Carl Icahn’s Icahn Enterprises LP.
Petition Challenges Third Circuit
The union's petition argued that the Third Circuit, in
failing to apply Section 1113's plain language, incorrectly subordinated
bargaining agreements and post-contract obligations to the bankruptcy code's
general preference for allowing debtors to reorganize their businesses.
It said the Third Circuit “obliterates” the role of the
National Labor Relations Board in addressing unfair labor practices of
employers in bankruptcy by improperly elevating bankruptcy law and bankruptcy
courts above the NLRA and the board.
The union added that the justices must resolve a conflict
between the Third Circuit's ruling and the Fourth Circuit's decision in Gloria
Manufacturing Corp. v. International Ladies Garment Workers Union, 734 F.2d
1020, 116 LRRM 2567 (4th Cir. 1984).
In that case, the Fourth Circuit held that an expired
bargaining agreement isn't subject to rejection under a bankruptcy law
provision on “executory contracts” (11 U.S.C. § 365(a)), which predated the
enactment of Section 1113.
Case Doesn't Warrant Review, Casino Argues
Opposing review, Trump Entertainment argued that the
union fails in its attempt to create a circuit split based on Gloria
Manufacturing.
The Fourth Circuit's case “involved a different and
distinct statutory provision with different and distinct terms” and is “only
authority for the proposition that section 365 does not apply to expired
collective bargaining agreements,” the company said.
Additionally, it said, the Third Circuit's ruling does
not conflict with Supreme Court precedent because the justices have never
interpreted Section 1113.
Davis, Cowell & Bowe, James & Hoffman and Cleary,
Josem & Trigiani represented the union. Dechert represented Trump
Entertainment.
Source: BNA.com
No comments:
Post a Comment