Full title: UCHENNA OBIANYO v. BROWN’S SHOPRITE, INC., et al
Court: United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Date published: Dec 10, 2009
Facts
Plaintiff Uchenna Obianyo, pro se, filed this action against defendants Brown’s ShopRite, Inc. and United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 1766. The complaint alleges that while the plaintiff was employed at ShopRite as a part-time cashier, his employment was terminated without good cause and without the involvement of any union representative. Complaint, ¶¶ 2, 4, 8. The plaintiff subsequently contacted the defendant’s union to file a grievance, and the union refused to file a grievance on the plaintiff’s behalf. Complaint, ¶¶ 10, 11. The complaint alleges due process violations by both ShopRite and the union. Defendants moved separately to dismiss the claims against them. The motions will be granted.
According to the complaint, ShopRite terminated the plaintiff because of a misunderstanding between the plaintiff and a company trainer and for the plaintiff’s violation of company policy. Complaint, ¶¶ 4, 6. Plaintiff contends that this explanation is vague and does not constitute sufficient reason for his discharge. Complaint, ¶ 7. According to ShopRite, the plaintiff, at the time of his termination, was a one-week cashier trainee whose employment was at will. ShopRite motion, 6. ShopRite appends to its motion documentation executed by the plaintiff upon commencement of his training in which the plaintiff acknowledged that his employment was at-will, and, further, that: “This document is not a contract of employment. I understand that my employment may be terminated by the company at any time, with or without reason or cause.” ShopRite motion, Exhibit “B”. ShopRite argues that because the plaintiff did not expect continued employment, his discharge cannot provide the basis for imposition of liability on ShopRite. Plaintiff did not file a response to ShopRite’s motion, and the motion will be granted.
Issue
Decision
The plaintiff claims that the union denied him his right to fair representation by refusing to file a grievance on his behalf after his discharge. The union acknowledges that it is part of a collective bargaining agreement with ShopRite, which includes a grievance-arbitration procedure. However, the agreement does not allow employees in continuous service for 60 or more days to appeal a discharge. The plaintiff was discharged before the 60-day probationary period, so neither the plaintiff nor the union had the right to file a grievance. The union’s motion to dismiss will be granted. The complaint also alleges a violation of the plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment rights, but the limitations of the Fifth Amendment restrict federal government actions, not private entities. The plaintiff’s complaint will be dismissed with prejudice.