Preview
NAILAH K. BYRD
CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
Court of Common Pleas
NOTICE OF REMOVAL
June 8,2023 18:31
By: ALLISON L. GOICO 0088777
Confirmation Nbr. 2879097
SARAH TURCHON CV 23 978942
vs.
Judge: MAUREEN CLANCY
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.
Pages Filed: 283
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
SARAH TURCHON,
Case No. CV 23 978942
Plaintiff,
v. Judge Maureen Clancy
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.,
Defendant.
DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Please take notice that Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc. has filed in the Office of the
Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, a Notice of Removal
of this case from the Cuyahoga County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A copy of the Notice of
Removal is attached as Exhibit 1 and made a part hereof. Please take notice that pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §1446(d), this Court “shall proceed no further unless and until the case is remanded.”
Dated: June 8, 2023
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Allison L. Gaiea________
Allison L. Goico (OH 0088777)
Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
255 E. 5th St., Suite 1900
Cincinnati, OH 45202
T:(513) 977-8613
F:(513) 977-8141
E: allison.goico@dinsmore.com
Counselfor Defendant
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on June 8, 2021, the foregoing was filed using the courts CM/ECF filing
system, which will serve the following counsel of record:
Claire I. Wade
Sobel, Wade &Mapley, LLC
55 Erieview Plaza, Suite 370
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
Counselfar Plaintiff
/s/Allison Goico
Counselfor Defendant
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
EXHIBIT 1
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 1 of 8. PagelD #: 1
united states district court
northern district of ohio
sarah turchon, Case No. l:23-cv-1157
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.,
Defendant.
DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc., (hereinafter “UPS”), hereby files this notice of
removal of the action described herein. Removal is procedurally proper and is based on federal
question jurisdiction; specifically, complete preemption under Section 301 of the Labor
Management Relations Act (LMRA). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1441, 1446(b); see also 29 U.S.C. §
185(a).
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiff Sarah Turchon (“Turchon” or “Plaintiff’) filed this action on May 3, 2023,
in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas captioned as Sarah Turchon v. United Parcel
Service, Inc., Case No. CV 23 978942 (the “State Court Action”).
2. Plaintiff's Complaint asserts a claim of gender discrimination under Ohio Revised
Code (“ORC”) § 4112, et seq. Complaint, 23-28. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that UPS
discriminated against her when it “failed to promote Turchon to full-time because of Turchon’s
gender.” Id. 27. Plaintiff does not allege that she grieved a failure to promote her to a full-time
driver position. See Complaint, generally.
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 2 of 8. PagelD #: 2
3. UPS was served with, and actually received copies of the State Court Action
through its registered agent on May 12, 2023, within thirty (30) days of this Notice of Removal.
4. Having determined that the complete preemption of Plaintiff's claim by the LMRA
raises a federal question, Defendants now file this notice or removal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441,
1446(b)(1).
ii. arguments and authorities
A. Removal is procedurally proper.
5. UPS’ Notice of Removal is timely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). Specifically,
UPS’ Notice of Removal is timely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) since this removal was filed
within thirty (30) days of service of the Complaint on May 12, 20223. Furthermore, this Notice of
Removal is filed less than one (1) year from the commencement of this action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1446(c)(1).
6. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), Defendants attach to this notice true and correct
copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served to date or that will be served to date (Ex. A).
There are no motions pending in the state court that require resolution by the Court. The National
Master Collective Bargaining Agreement (Ex. B) and Central Region Supplement (Ex. C) are
attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. An index of filings, including a list of the names and
contact information of counsel that have appeared in the state court, is provided as well.
7. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), UPS will promptly provide written notice
of the filing of this Notice to Plaintiff.
8. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), UPS will promptly file a duplicate copy of this
Notice with the Clerk of the Cuyahoga Court of Common Pleas.
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 9789423 Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 3 of 8. PagelD #: 3
9. Venue is proper in the Northern District of Ohio under 28 U.S.C. §1446(a), as the
district encompass Cuyahoga County, the place in which the removed action is pending and where
a substantial portion of the relevant events are alleged to have occurred. See generally Ex. A,
Complaint, 4, 14.
B. The Court has federal question jurisdiction because Plaintiff’s state-law claim
is completedpreempted by the LMRA.
10. Generally, removal of a state court action to federal court is proper under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1331 if the plaintiff's claims arise under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. “The presence or absence of federal-question jurisdiction is generally
governed by the "well-pleaded complaint rule," which provides that federal jurisdiction exists only
when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiff’s properly pleaded complaint.”
Friedman v. Montefiore, 610 F. Supp. 3d 1032, 1037-1038 (6th Cir. 2022); see also Boldt v. N.
States Power Co., 904 F.3d 586, 590 (8th Cir. 2018) (cleaned up) (finding federal question
jurisdiction and denying remand because allegations pled as state-law claims were completely
preempted by LMRA 301).
11. “But the well-pleaded-complaint rule also has a corollary: the doctrine of complete
preemption. Some federal statutes completely preempt—and thereby wholly displace—state-law
claims, so that a claim which comes within the scope of that cause of action, even if pleaded in
terms of state law, is in reality based on federal law.” BeneficialNat’lBankv. Anderson, 539 U.S.
1, 8 (2003); see also, Roddy v. Grand Trunk W. R.R., 395 F. 3d 318, 323 (6th Cir. 2005) (citing
Caterpillar, 482 U.S. at 393) (complete preemption arises where a federal cause of action converts
the state-law claim into a federal one for the purposes of the well-pleaded complaint rule).
12. The LMRA is one such federal statute that completely preempts state law claims.
The LMRA preempts not only claims founded on rights created by collective-bargaining
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 97894$ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 4 of 8. PagelD #: 4
agreements (CBAs), but also claims that are “substantially dependent on analysis of a [CBA].”
Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 394 (1987)).1 Section 301 of the LMRA creates federal
subject matter jurisdiction over suits alleging violations of a CBA. See Alongi, 386 F. 3d at 723.
As the Supreme Court has expressed, Section 301 “authorizes federal courts to fashion a body of
federal law for the enforcement of these collective bargaining agreements.” Textile Workers Union
ofAm. v. Lincoln Mills ofAla., 353 U.S. 448, 450-51 (1957).
13. Accordingly, § 301 completely preempts any state-law cause of action “founded
directly on the rights created by collective-bargaining agreements” or “substantially dependent on
analysis of a collective-bargaining agreement.” Caterpillar, 482 U.S. at 394.2 The Sixth Circuit
accordingly applies a two-step approach to deciding whether § 301 complete preemption applies
to a state-law claim. DeCoe v. Gen. Motors Corp., 32 F.3d 212, 216 (6th Cir. 1994). First, courts
examine whether proof of the state law claim requires interpretation of collective bargaining
agreement terms. Alongi, 386 F. 3d at 724. Second, courts determine whether the right claimed by
the plaintiff is created by the collective bargaining agreement or by state law. Id. If neither or only
one criterion is satisfied, § 301 preemption is warranted. Id.
14. Plaintiff is a member of the local chapter of the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters (“the Union” or “IBT”). The Union and UPS have negotiated and executed an expansive
CBA, including a national agreement and a regional supplemental agreement (“the CBA”). Ex. A,
B.
1 It is the "unusually powerful pre-emptive force of § 301 [of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947]"
that places it in the small category of statutes that not only preempt state law but also authorize removal of actions
that sought relief only under state law. Alongi v. Ford Motor Co., 386 F. 3d 716 (6th Cir. 2004).
2 As written, Section 301 confers federal jurisdiction upon disputes involving CBAs. However, it has been
interpreted as one of only three laws imposing a complete preemption standard over state-law claims. Allis-Chalmers
Corp. v. Lueck, 471 U.S. 202 (1985); Local 174, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers ofAm. v. Lucas
Flour Co., 369 U.S. 95, 104 (1961); Textile Workers Union ofAm. v. Lincoln Mills ofAla., 353 U.S. 448, 455, 457
(1957).
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 5 of 8. PagelD #: 5
15. Plaintiffs alleged failure to promote claim is accordingly dependent on the
seniority rights, job bidding process, and grievance provisions controlled by these collective
bargaining agreements.
16. Section 301 completely preempts Plaintiff's claims, rendering them removable
based on federal question jurisdiction, because the right claimed by Plaintiff—an award of the full
time driver position—is created by the collective bargaining agreement, and resolution requires
interpretation of the Central Region Supplemental Agreement to the National Master United Parcel
Service Agreement with the IBT
17. Among other relevant provisions, the CBA contains provisions (a) dictating the
required procedure for filling vacant full-time positions, (b) placing limitations on UPS’ ability to
hire external applicants; and (c) mandating UPS’ local grievance and arbitration procedures for
disputes arising out of the provisions of the CBA. See Ex. C, Articles 3, 5.
18. For example, Article 3, Section 8 of the CBA provides that “[q]ualified full-time
employees with six (6) months or more seniority may select permanent vacancies and new
permanent jobs.. .The vacancy shall be filled by the senior bidding employee.” Ex. C, Art. 3, Sec.
8. The job bidding procedure further requires that, “[i]f the vacancy is not bid by an employee
within the classification the vacancy exists, the bid shall be open to all employees within the
center.” Id. Moreover, “[b]efore hiring from outside, the Employer will give consideration to other
full-time employees who have indicated, in writing, a preference to work in the classification of
work in which the last opening occurs.” Id.
19. Article 3, Section 10 of the CBA provides that “After the completion of the job
selection procedure outlined in Section 8 of this Article, the resulting opening will be filled as
follows: Part-time employees with six (6) or more month’s seniority may bid on a full-time
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942$ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 6 of 8. PagelD #: 6
opening in their building.. .providing they meet the same requirements as applicants for that full
time job...The job will be awarded to the senior bidding employee.” Ex. C, Art. 3, Sec. 10. This
procedure is subject to a “six-for-one basis,” meaning that for every seven jobs filled through the
bidding process, Defendant may only fill one job from outside sources. Id.
20. The CBA also states that “[a] grievance is hereby jointly defined to be any
controversy, complaint, misunderstanding, or dispute arising as to interpretation, application or
observance of any provisions of this Agreement.” Ex. C, Article 5, Section 1. Furthermore, the
CBA provides that “[i]t shall be the responsibility of the employee to reduce the grievance to
writing on the regular grievance form provided by the union and have it submitted to the company
within five (5) working days.” Id.
21. Here, Plaintiff claims that she was denied a winning bid to transfer from a part-time
driver position to a full-time driver position. Complaint, ^15, 19. Plaintiffs claim is substantially
dependent on interpreting specific provisions of the CBA.3 Plaintiff's state-law claim argues that
she was entitled to the full-time driver position based on the job bidding process is an explicit
claim that she is entitled to enforce the results of the job bidding process under the CBA. See Ex.
C, Article 3, Sections 8, 10.
22. Moreover, Plaintiff was required to grieve her lost bid for a full-time driver position
pursuant to the provisions of the CBA. Ex. C, Article 5, Section 1.
23. As such, Plaintiffs state law claim is inextricably intertwined with the terms of the
CBA bargained for by UPS and Plaintiffs Union. Issues regarding whether Plaintiff was required
to grieve her lost bid for a full-time position, and whether UPS followed the proper bidding
3 If removal is challenged, Defendant reserves the right to show Turchon’s other allegations establish her
claim is substantially dependent upon interpreting additional CBA provisions, as well as any policies incorporated by
reference.
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 7 of 8. PagelD #: 7
procedure outlined by the CBA, cannot be resolved without interpreting the CBA.4 Accordingly,
Section 301 of the LMRA completely preempts Plaintiffs claims. 5
24. Thus, this State Court Action is removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) because
it is within the original jurisdiction of this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 in that it involves a claim
arising under the laws of the United States, namely the LMRA.
25. By virtue of this Notice of Removal, UPS does not waive its right to assert any
claims or defenses or to make other motions related to Plaintiff's claims.
iii. conclusion & prayer
For the foregoing reasons, UPS respectfully requests that this action be removed to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, and the Cuyahoga Court of Common
Pleas proceed no further with respect to this action.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Allison L. Goico______
Allison L. Goico (OH 0088777)
Jonathan M. Kelly (OH 0095738)
Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
255 E. Fifth Street, Suite 1900
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 977-8200
Facsimile: (513) 977-8141
allison.goico@dinsmore.com
j on.kelly@dinsmore.com
Counselfor Defendant
4 By its very nature, complete preemption means that there is “no such thing as a state law claim” precisely
because any state-law claim converts to a federal one. Beneficial Nat’l Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 9 (2003). Just
as health plan disputes automatically convert to ERISA claims regardless of how pled, so too do state-law claims
under Section 301 if their resolution is “substantially dependent on analysis of a collective bargaining agreement” or
inextricably intertwined with it. Allis-Chalmers, 471 U.S. at 209. “Complete preemption is a rare doctrine, one that
represents an extraordinary pre-emptive power[.] The circumstances are so rare in fact that the Supreme Court has
recognized complete preemption in only three areas: § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947
(“LMRA”), § 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), and actions for usury against
national banks under the National Bank Act.” Devon Energy Prod. Co., L.P. v. Mosaic Potash Carlsbad, Inc, 693
F.3d 1195, 1204-05 (10th Cir. 2012) (internal citations and quotations omitted).
5 Defendant will be submitting a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint on this basis.
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 9780427/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 8 of 8. PagelD #: 8
certificate of service
I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Removal has been filed this 9th day of June,
2023, with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF filing system, and mailed the same by
certified mail to the following:
Claire I. Wade
Sobel, Wade &Mapley, LLC
55 Erieview Plaza, Suite 370
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
Counselfor Plaintiff
/s/ Allison L. Goico
Allison L. Goico
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 1 of 8. PagelD #: 9
EXHIBIT A
NAILAH K. BYRD
CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
Court of Common Pleas
New Case Electronically Filed: COMPLAINT
May 3,2023 15:08
By: CLAIRE I. WADE 0093174
Confirmation Nbr. 2847411
SARAH TURCHON CV 23 978942
vs.
Judge: MAUREEN CLANCY
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.
Pages Filed: 5
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOVICE 9 £Z8@fl2r/aConfiritiatiOIMINM.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 2 of 8. PagelD #: 10
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
SARAH TURCHON ) CASE NO:
14409 Sprengel Ave. )
Cleveland, Ohio 44135 ) JUDGE
Plaintiff, )
)
V. COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
)
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. RELIEF AND DAMAGES
)
4300 East 68th Street
)
Cleveland, Ohio 44105
)
)
(Jury Demand Endorsed Herein)
)
Defendant. )
)
Plaintiff, Sarah Turchon, by and through undersigned counsel, as her Complaint against
Defendant, states and avers the following:
INTRODUCTION
1. Turchon is a Cuyahoga County, Ohio resident.
2. Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”) is domestic corporation with a place of
business located at 4300 East 68th Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44105.
3. UPS is an “employer” within the meaning of Ohio Rev. Code § 4112.
4. The conduct and injuries giving rise to the claims below arose in Cuyahoga County, Ohio.
5. Personal jurisdiction is proper over the Defendant pursuant to Ohio Revised Code
§2307.382(A)(1)
6. Venue is proper pursuant to Civ.R. 3(B)(3).
7. This Court is a court of general jurisdiction over all subject matters of this Complaint and the
claims presented herein.
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 3 of 8. PagelD #: 11
8. Within 300 days of the conduct alleged below, Plaintiff filed a Charge of Discrimination with
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), specifically, Charge No. 532
2022-03509, which was dual filed with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (“OCRC”).
9. On April 24, 2023, Turchon received a Right to Sue letter, dismissing Charge No. 532-2022
03509, in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(l), attached as Exhibit A.
10. Turchon has properly exhausted her administrative remedies.
11. Turchon files this Complaint within 90 days of receiving her Right to Sue letter from the
EEOC.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
12. Turchon incorporates by reference the allegations from the preceding paragraphs, as if fully
restated herein.
13. Turchon is female.
14. Turchon was hired by UPS as a part-time driver in the “metro south” center located at 4300
E. 68th Street, Cleveland in May 2021.
15. Turchon put a bid in for a full-time position, and in February 2022, Turchon was told that she
won the bid.
16. In February 2022, Turchon’s supervisor, Kevin Phillips informed Turchon that she would not
get the full-time position for the metro south location.
17. Phillips initially texted Turchon that “there are some very unfortunate things I won’t text that
you need to know.”
18. When Phillips and Turchon met in person the following Monday, Phillips stated that the
manager of metro south, Jay (last name unknown), “doesn’t think a woman can handle” the
full-time driver position.
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 4 of 8. PagelD #: 12
19. Turchon was never given a full-time driver position.
20. There were no female full-time drivers at the metro south location during Turchon’s
employment.
21. Turchon was not offered the full-time driver position because she is female.
22. In April 2023, Turchon resigned her part-time position at UPS.
COUNT: GENDER DISCRIMINATION
23. Turchon incorporates by reference the allegations from the preceding paragraphs, as if fully
restated herein.
24. Turchon is female, as such, a member of a statutorily protected group, pursuant to Ohio Rev.
Code §4112.
25. Throughout her employment, Turchon has been fully competent and qualified for her
position with Defendants.
26. Ohio Rev. Code § 4112 provides that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice for an
employer to discriminate against an employee on the basis of the employee’s gender.
27. Defendant failed to promote Turchon to full-time because of Turchon’s gender, in
contravention of Ohio Rev. Code § 4112.
28. As a direct result of Defendant’s unlawful conduct, Turchon suffered and continues to suffer
pecuniary harm and emotional distress.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff, Sarah Turchon, seeks judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of
$25,000 to fully, fairly, and justly compensate her for injury, damage, and loss, and respectfully
prays that this Court enter judgment in her favor and award her past economic and non-economic
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 5 of 8. PagelD #: 13
compensatory damages, fringe benefits, consequential damages, incidental damages, punitive
damages, liquidated damages, interest, all reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and expenses, and any
additional legal or equitable relief available under law, including, but not limited to back pay,
future losses, reinstatement, and promotion.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Claire I. Wade________
Claire I. Wade (0093174)
Sobel, Wade & Mapley, LLC
55 Erieview Plaza, Suite 370
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
T:(216)223-7213
F:(216)223-7213
Wade@ swml awfirm. com
Attorney for Plaintiff Sarah Turchon
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 6 of 8. PagelD #: 14
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff Sarah Turchon demands a trial by jury by the maximum number of jurors
permitted.
/s/ Claire I. Wade
Claire I. Wade (0093174)
Attorney for Plaintiff
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT
Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 7 of 8. PagelD #: 15
THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
Clerk of Courts | The Justice Center | 1200 Ontario Street 1st Floor, Cleveland, Ohio 44113
SARAH TURCHON CASE NO. OV23978942
Plaintiff
JUDGE MAUREEN CLANCY
V.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. SUMMONS SUMC CM
Defendant Notice ID: 50547327
50547327
From: SARAH TURCHON P1 Atty.: CLAIRE I WADE
14409 SPRENGELAVE. 55 ERIEVIEW PLAZA
CLEVELAND OH 44135 SUITE 370
CLEVELAND, OH 44114
To: UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. D1
4300 EAST 68TH STREET
CLEVELAND OH 44105
NOTICE TO THE DEFENDANT:
The Plaintiff has filed a lawsuit against you in this Court. You are named as a defendant. A copy of the Complaint is
attached.
If you wish to respond to the Complaint, you must deliver a written Answer to the Plaintiff’s attorney (or the Plaintiff if
not represented by an attorney) at the above address within 28 days after receiving this Summons (not counting the
day you received it). A letter or a phone call will not protect you. Civil Rule 5 explains the ways that you may deliver
the Answer (http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/civil/CivilProcedure.pdf )
You must also file a copy of your Answer with this Court within 3 days after you serve it on the Plaintiff. You can file
your Answer with the Clerk of Courts by one of the following methods: 1) In-person or by mail at the above address
or 2) electronically through the online e-Filing system. For more information on using the e-Filing system, visit
http://coc.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/efiling.aspx .
If you fail to serve and file your Answer, you will lose valuable rights. The Court will decide the case in favor of the
Plaintiff and grant the relief requested in the Complaint by entering a default judgment against you.
You may wish to hire an attorney to represent you. Because this is a civil lawsuit, the Court cannot appoint an
attorney for you. If you need help finding a lawyer, contact a local bar association and request assistance.
Nailah K. Byrd
Clerk of Court of Common Pleas
216-443-7950
Date Sent: 05/04/2023 By.
Deputy
CMSN130
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
UNaTEfrSTAIOS-Sl Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 8 of 8. PagelD #: 16
POSTAL SERVICE
Date Produced: 05/15/2023
CERTIFIED MAIL SOLUTIONS INC.:
The following is the delivery information for Certified Mail™/RRE item number 9314 8001 1300 3548
2057 62. Our records indicate that this item was delivered on 05/11/2023 at 10:41 a.m. in CLEVELAND,
OH 44105. The scanned image of the recipient information is provided below.
Signature of Recipient:
e / ,,<5^
Address of Recipient:
Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional assistance,
please contact your local post office or Postal Service representative.
Sincerely,
United States Postal Service
The customer reference number shown below is not validated or endorsed by the United States Postal
Service. It is solely for customer use.
R^ed06/08/20m83fANOTlCE?^V(2Bi978942^0nfirmatfti2P0- P£
(b) The collection of dues when authorized by appropriate Local
Union action; and
(c) The transmission of such messages and information, which
shall originate with, and are authorized by the Local Union or its
officers, provided such messages and information:
(1) have been reduced to writing; or
(2) if not reduced to writing, are of a routine nature and do not in
volve work stoppages, slowdowns, refusal to handle goods, or any
other interference with the Employer's business.
Job Stewards and alternates have no authority to take strike action
or any other action interrupting the Employer's business, except as
authorized by official action of the Local Union. The Employer rec
ognizes these limitations upon the authorized Job Stewards and
their alternates, and shall not hold the Union liable for any unautho
rized acts. The Employer in so recognizing such limitations shall
have the authority to impose proper, nondiscriminatory discipline,
including discharge. However, in the event the Job Steward or the
designated alternate has led, or instigated or encouraged unautho
rized strike action, slowdown or work stoppages in violation of this
Agreement he/she may be singled out for more serious discipline,
up to and including discharge. Stewards and/or alternate stewards
shall not be subject to discipline for performing any of the duties
within the scope of their authority as defined in this Section, in the
manner permitted by this Section.
Recognizing the importance of the role of the Union Steward in
resolving problems or disputes between the Employer and its em
ployees, the Employer reaffirms its commitment to the active in
volvement of union stewards in such processes in accordance with
the terms of this Article.
The Job Steward or the designated alternate shall be permitted rea
sonable time to investigate, present and process grievances on the
Company's property without interruption of the Employer's opera
tion. Upon notification to his or her supervisor, a steward shall be
- 13 -
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
-cv-G^T* Doc #■ 1-2 Filed: 06/08/23 24 of 200. P£
afforded the right to leave his/her work area for a reasonable period
of time to investigate, present and process grievances and to repre
sent a fellow employee concerning grievances or discipline so long
as such activity does not interrupt the Employer's operations. This
shall include the steward's right to represent an employee in con
nection with any grievance concerning safety issues. The Employer
will make a reasonable effort to insure that its operations are not
interrupted by the steward's engaging in such activity. The Employ
er shall not use interruption of its operation as a subterfuge for de
nying such right to the steward.
Where mutually agreed to by the Local Union and Employer, stew
ards may investigate off the property or other than during their reg
ular schedule, without loss of time or pay. Stewards will be paid for
time spent in meetings under this Article which occur during the
steward's regular working hours. Stewards shall also be paid for
time spent in meetings which occur outside his or her working
hours, or on days off, by mutual consent. Such time spent during
the Job Steward's or the designated alternate's regular working
hours shall be considered working hours in computing daily and/or
weekly overtime if within the regular schedule of the Job Steward
or the designated alternate.
The Employer recognizes the employee's right to be given request
ed representation by a Steward, or the designated alternate, at such
time as the employee reasonably contemplates disciplinary action.
The Employer also recognizes the steward's right to be given re
quested representation by another Steward, or the designated alter
nate, at such time as the Steward reasonably contemplates disci
plinary action. When requested by the Union or the employee, there
shall be a steward present whenever the Employer meets with an
employee concerning grievances or discipline or investigatory in
terviews. In such cases, the meeting shall not be continued until the
steward or alternate steward is present.
If an employee does not wish to have a Union Steward in any meet
ing where the employee has a right to Union representation under this
Article, the employee shall sign a waiver of Union representation, a
copy of which shall be furnished to the Union upon its request.
- 14 -
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
-CV-01157 Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 06/08/23 25 £>fti2P0- P£
If requested by the Local Union, the designated Stewards will be
provided with copies of all warning, suspension and discharge let
ters. If a supplement has no provision allowing a Local Union to
request documents/information with regard to pending grievances,
the following shall be incorporated into the Supplement: “The Em
ployer shall, upon written request, provide the Local Union or the
steward designated by the Local Union, with documents/informa-
tion that is reasonably related (based on NLRA standards) to the
pending grievance.”
Job Stewards, or designated alternates, shall be allowed to wear an
identifying steward's badge, provided by the Union, at all times
while on the Employer's premises.
ARTICLE 5. SANITARY CONDITIONS
The Employer agrees to maintain a clean, sanitary washroom having
hot and cold running water with toilet facilities in all present and fu
ture buildings. The Employer further agrees to provide separate toilet
and changing facilities for male and female employees in all present
and future UPS buildings which have more than fifteen (15) drivers.
The Employer shall implement procedures designed to ensure pri
vacy for all employees when using facilities in UPS buildings with
fifteen (15) or fewer drivers.
Such toilet facilities will be equipped with proper ventilation devic
es and shall be heated as climatic conditions shall warrant.
The Employer agrees to provide lockers for those employees who
are required to change into a uniform or take a lunch period. All
other employees will be provided a suitable area for keeping per
sonal items and clothes. Assigned lockers will not be opened by
the Employer unless either the employee or a Union representative
is present.
Where the Employer and the Union agree that the local water is not
suitable for drinking, the Employer will provide bottled drinking
water.
- 15 -
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT
-cv-0^£76 Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 06/08/23 26 of 200. Pa
ARTICLE 6.
Section 1. Extra Contract Agreements
Except as may be otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Em
ployer agrees not to enter into, or attempt to enter into, any agree
ment or contract with its employees, either individually or collec
tively, or to require or attempt to require employees to sign any
document, either individually or collectively, which in any way
conflicts with the provisions of this Agreement. Any such Agree
ment or document shall be null and void. Any such agreement or
document may not be placed in an employee's file or used by the
Employer as a basis for discipline or used in connection with any
disciplinary proceeding, nor may any such agreement or document
nor the contents thereof be divulged to any person or entity.
In addition, the Company will not discipline an employee for refus
ing to sign any Company form related to the principle of a fair day's
work unless the signing is required by law or by this Agreement.
Section 2. Workweek Reduction
If either the Fair Labor Standards Act or the Hours of Service Reg
ulations are subsequently amended so as to result in substantial
penalties to either the employees or the Employer, a written notice
shall be sent by either party requesting negotiations to amend those
provisions which are affected. Thereafter the parties shall enter into
immediate negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually
satisfactory solution. In the event the parties cannot agree on a solu
tion within sixty (60) days, or mutually agreed extensions thereof
after receipt of the stated written notice, either party shall be al
lowed economic recourse.
Section 3. New Equipment
Where new types of equipment and/or operations, for which rates
of pay are not established by this Agreement, are put into use after
the ratification date of this Agreement within operations covered by
this Agreement, rates governing such operations shall be subject to
negotiations between the parties. This paragraph shall apply to all
new types of equipment including office and clerical equipment. In
- 16 -
Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31
Preview
NAILAH K. BYRD CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Court of Common Pleas NOTICE OF REMOVAL June 8,2023 18:31 By: ALLISON L. GOICO 0088777 Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 SARAH TURCHON CV 23 978942 vs. Judge: MAUREEN CLANCY UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Pages Filed: 283 Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO SARAH TURCHON, Case No. CV 23 978942 Plaintiff, v. Judge Maureen Clancy UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Defendant. DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL Please take notice that Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc. has filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, a Notice of Removal of this case from the Cuyahoga County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A copy of the Notice of Removal is attached as Exhibit 1 and made a part hereof. Please take notice that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(d), this Court “shall proceed no further unless and until the case is remanded.” Dated: June 8, 2023 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Allison L. Gaiea________ Allison L. Goico (OH 0088777) Dinsmore & Shohl LLP 255 E. 5th St., Suite 1900 Cincinnati, OH 45202 T:(513) 977-8613 F:(513) 977-8141 E: allison.goico@dinsmore.com Counselfor Defendant Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on June 8, 2021, the foregoing was filed using the courts CM/ECF filing system, which will serve the following counsel of record: Claire I. Wade Sobel, Wade &Mapley, LLC 55 Erieview Plaza, Suite 370 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Counselfar Plaintiff /s/Allison Goico Counselfor Defendant Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT EXHIBIT 1 Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 1 of 8. PagelD #: 1 united states district court northern district of ohio sarah turchon, Case No. l:23-cv-1157 Plaintiff, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Defendant. DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc., (hereinafter “UPS”), hereby files this notice of removal of the action described herein. Removal is procedurally proper and is based on federal question jurisdiction; specifically, complete preemption under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1441, 1446(b); see also 29 U.S.C. § 185(a). I. INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiff Sarah Turchon (“Turchon” or “Plaintiff’) filed this action on May 3, 2023, in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas captioned as Sarah Turchon v. United Parcel Service, Inc., Case No. CV 23 978942 (the “State Court Action”). 2. Plaintiff's Complaint asserts a claim of gender discrimination under Ohio Revised Code (“ORC”) § 4112, et seq. Complaint, 23-28. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that UPS discriminated against her when it “failed to promote Turchon to full-time because of Turchon’s gender.” Id. 27. Plaintiff does not allege that she grieved a failure to promote her to a full-time driver position. See Complaint, generally. Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 2 of 8. PagelD #: 2 3. UPS was served with, and actually received copies of the State Court Action through its registered agent on May 12, 2023, within thirty (30) days of this Notice of Removal. 4. Having determined that the complete preemption of Plaintiff's claim by the LMRA raises a federal question, Defendants now file this notice or removal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446(b)(1). ii. arguments and authorities A. Removal is procedurally proper. 5. UPS’ Notice of Removal is timely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). Specifically, UPS’ Notice of Removal is timely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) since this removal was filed within thirty (30) days of service of the Complaint on May 12, 20223. Furthermore, this Notice of Removal is filed less than one (1) year from the commencement of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(1). 6. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), Defendants attach to this notice true and correct copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served to date or that will be served to date (Ex. A). There are no motions pending in the state court that require resolution by the Court. The National Master Collective Bargaining Agreement (Ex. B) and Central Region Supplement (Ex. C) are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. An index of filings, including a list of the names and contact information of counsel that have appeared in the state court, is provided as well. 7. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), UPS will promptly provide written notice of the filing of this Notice to Plaintiff. 8. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), UPS will promptly file a duplicate copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Cuyahoga Court of Common Pleas. Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 9789423 Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 3 of 8. PagelD #: 3 9. Venue is proper in the Northern District of Ohio under 28 U.S.C. §1446(a), as the district encompass Cuyahoga County, the place in which the removed action is pending and where a substantial portion of the relevant events are alleged to have occurred. See generally Ex. A, Complaint, 4, 14. B. The Court has federal question jurisdiction because Plaintiff’s state-law claim is completedpreempted by the LMRA. 10. Generally, removal of a state court action to federal court is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 if the plaintiff's claims arise under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. “The presence or absence of federal-question jurisdiction is generally governed by the "well-pleaded complaint rule," which provides that federal jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiff’s properly pleaded complaint.” Friedman v. Montefiore, 610 F. Supp. 3d 1032, 1037-1038 (6th Cir. 2022); see also Boldt v. N. States Power Co., 904 F.3d 586, 590 (8th Cir. 2018) (cleaned up) (finding federal question jurisdiction and denying remand because allegations pled as state-law claims were completely preempted by LMRA 301). 11. “But the well-pleaded-complaint rule also has a corollary: the doctrine of complete preemption. Some federal statutes completely preempt—and thereby wholly displace—state-law claims, so that a claim which comes within the scope of that cause of action, even if pleaded in terms of state law, is in reality based on federal law.” BeneficialNat’lBankv. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 8 (2003); see also, Roddy v. Grand Trunk W. R.R., 395 F. 3d 318, 323 (6th Cir. 2005) (citing Caterpillar, 482 U.S. at 393) (complete preemption arises where a federal cause of action converts the state-law claim into a federal one for the purposes of the well-pleaded complaint rule). 12. The LMRA is one such federal statute that completely preempts state law claims. The LMRA preempts not only claims founded on rights created by collective-bargaining Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 97894$ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 4 of 8. PagelD #: 4 agreements (CBAs), but also claims that are “substantially dependent on analysis of a [CBA].” Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 394 (1987)).1 Section 301 of the LMRA creates federal subject matter jurisdiction over suits alleging violations of a CBA. See Alongi, 386 F. 3d at 723. As the Supreme Court has expressed, Section 301 “authorizes federal courts to fashion a body of federal law for the enforcement of these collective bargaining agreements.” Textile Workers Union ofAm. v. Lincoln Mills ofAla., 353 U.S. 448, 450-51 (1957). 13. Accordingly, § 301 completely preempts any state-law cause of action “founded directly on the rights created by collective-bargaining agreements” or “substantially dependent on analysis of a collective-bargaining agreement.” Caterpillar, 482 U.S. at 394.2 The Sixth Circuit accordingly applies a two-step approach to deciding whether § 301 complete preemption applies to a state-law claim. DeCoe v. Gen. Motors Corp., 32 F.3d 212, 216 (6th Cir. 1994). First, courts examine whether proof of the state law claim requires interpretation of collective bargaining agreement terms. Alongi, 386 F. 3d at 724. Second, courts determine whether the right claimed by the plaintiff is created by the collective bargaining agreement or by state law. Id. If neither or only one criterion is satisfied, § 301 preemption is warranted. Id. 14. Plaintiff is a member of the local chapter of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“the Union” or “IBT”). The Union and UPS have negotiated and executed an expansive CBA, including a national agreement and a regional supplemental agreement (“the CBA”). Ex. A, B. 1 It is the "unusually powerful pre-emptive force of § 301 [of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947]" that places it in the small category of statutes that not only preempt state law but also authorize removal of actions that sought relief only under state law. Alongi v. Ford Motor Co., 386 F. 3d 716 (6th Cir. 2004). 2 As written, Section 301 confers federal jurisdiction upon disputes involving CBAs. However, it has been interpreted as one of only three laws imposing a complete preemption standard over state-law claims. Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck, 471 U.S. 202 (1985); Local 174, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers ofAm. v. Lucas Flour Co., 369 U.S. 95, 104 (1961); Textile Workers Union ofAm. v. Lincoln Mills ofAla., 353 U.S. 448, 455, 457 (1957). Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 5 of 8. PagelD #: 5 15. Plaintiffs alleged failure to promote claim is accordingly dependent on the seniority rights, job bidding process, and grievance provisions controlled by these collective bargaining agreements. 16. Section 301 completely preempts Plaintiff's claims, rendering them removable based on federal question jurisdiction, because the right claimed by Plaintiff—an award of the full time driver position—is created by the collective bargaining agreement, and resolution requires interpretation of the Central Region Supplemental Agreement to the National Master United Parcel Service Agreement with the IBT 17. Among other relevant provisions, the CBA contains provisions (a) dictating the required procedure for filling vacant full-time positions, (b) placing limitations on UPS’ ability to hire external applicants; and (c) mandating UPS’ local grievance and arbitration procedures for disputes arising out of the provisions of the CBA. See Ex. C, Articles 3, 5. 18. For example, Article 3, Section 8 of the CBA provides that “[q]ualified full-time employees with six (6) months or more seniority may select permanent vacancies and new permanent jobs.. .The vacancy shall be filled by the senior bidding employee.” Ex. C, Art. 3, Sec. 8. The job bidding procedure further requires that, “[i]f the vacancy is not bid by an employee within the classification the vacancy exists, the bid shall be open to all employees within the center.” Id. Moreover, “[b]efore hiring from outside, the Employer will give consideration to other full-time employees who have indicated, in writing, a preference to work in the classification of work in which the last opening occurs.” Id. 19. Article 3, Section 10 of the CBA provides that “After the completion of the job selection procedure outlined in Section 8 of this Article, the resulting opening will be filled as follows: Part-time employees with six (6) or more month’s seniority may bid on a full-time Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942$ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 6 of 8. PagelD #: 6 opening in their building.. .providing they meet the same requirements as applicants for that full time job...The job will be awarded to the senior bidding employee.” Ex. C, Art. 3, Sec. 10. This procedure is subject to a “six-for-one basis,” meaning that for every seven jobs filled through the bidding process, Defendant may only fill one job from outside sources. Id. 20. The CBA also states that “[a] grievance is hereby jointly defined to be any controversy, complaint, misunderstanding, or dispute arising as to interpretation, application or observance of any provisions of this Agreement.” Ex. C, Article 5, Section 1. Furthermore, the CBA provides that “[i]t shall be the responsibility of the employee to reduce the grievance to writing on the regular grievance form provided by the union and have it submitted to the company within five (5) working days.” Id. 21. Here, Plaintiff claims that she was denied a winning bid to transfer from a part-time driver position to a full-time driver position. Complaint, ^15, 19. Plaintiffs claim is substantially dependent on interpreting specific provisions of the CBA.3 Plaintiff's state-law claim argues that she was entitled to the full-time driver position based on the job bidding process is an explicit claim that she is entitled to enforce the results of the job bidding process under the CBA. See Ex. C, Article 3, Sections 8, 10. 22. Moreover, Plaintiff was required to grieve her lost bid for a full-time driver position pursuant to the provisions of the CBA. Ex. C, Article 5, Section 1. 23. As such, Plaintiffs state law claim is inextricably intertwined with the terms of the CBA bargained for by UPS and Plaintiffs Union. Issues regarding whether Plaintiff was required to grieve her lost bid for a full-time position, and whether UPS followed the proper bidding 3 If removal is challenged, Defendant reserves the right to show Turchon’s other allegations establish her claim is substantially dependent upon interpreting additional CBA provisions, as well as any policies incorporated by reference. Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 7 of 8. PagelD #: 7 procedure outlined by the CBA, cannot be resolved without interpreting the CBA.4 Accordingly, Section 301 of the LMRA completely preempts Plaintiffs claims. 5 24. Thus, this State Court Action is removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) because it is within the original jurisdiction of this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 in that it involves a claim arising under the laws of the United States, namely the LMRA. 25. By virtue of this Notice of Removal, UPS does not waive its right to assert any claims or defenses or to make other motions related to Plaintiff's claims. iii. conclusion & prayer For the foregoing reasons, UPS respectfully requests that this action be removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, and the Cuyahoga Court of Common Pleas proceed no further with respect to this action. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Allison L. Goico______ Allison L. Goico (OH 0088777) Jonathan M. Kelly (OH 0095738) Dinsmore & Shohl LLP 255 E. Fifth Street, Suite 1900 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Telephone: (513) 977-8200 Facsimile: (513) 977-8141 allison.goico@dinsmore.com j on.kelly@dinsmore.com Counselfor Defendant 4 By its very nature, complete preemption means that there is “no such thing as a state law claim” precisely because any state-law claim converts to a federal one. Beneficial Nat’l Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 9 (2003). Just as health plan disputes automatically convert to ERISA claims regardless of how pled, so too do state-law claims under Section 301 if their resolution is “substantially dependent on analysis of a collective bargaining agreement” or inextricably intertwined with it. Allis-Chalmers, 471 U.S. at 209. “Complete preemption is a rare doctrine, one that represents an extraordinary pre-emptive power[.] The circumstances are so rare in fact that the Supreme Court has recognized complete preemption in only three areas: § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (“LMRA”), § 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), and actions for usury against national banks under the National Bank Act.” Devon Energy Prod. Co., L.P. v. Mosaic Potash Carlsbad, Inc, 693 F.3d 1195, 1204-05 (10th Cir. 2012) (internal citations and quotations omitted). 5 Defendant will be submitting a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint on this basis. Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 9780427/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/08/23 8 of 8. PagelD #: 8 certificate of service I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Removal has been filed this 9th day of June, 2023, with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF filing system, and mailed the same by certified mail to the following: Claire I. Wade Sobel, Wade &Mapley, LLC 55 Erieview Plaza, Suite 370 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Counselfor Plaintiff /s/ Allison L. Goico Allison L. Goico Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942/ Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 1 of 8. PagelD #: 9 EXHIBIT A NAILAH K. BYRD CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Court of Common Pleas New Case Electronically Filed: COMPLAINT May 3,2023 15:08 By: CLAIRE I. WADE 0093174 Confirmation Nbr. 2847411 SARAH TURCHON CV 23 978942 vs. Judge: MAUREEN CLANCY UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Pages Filed: 5 Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOVICE 9 £Z8@fl2r/aConfiritiatiOIMINM.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 2 of 8. PagelD #: 10 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO SARAH TURCHON ) CASE NO: 14409 Sprengel Ave. ) Cleveland, Ohio 44135 ) JUDGE Plaintiff, ) ) V. COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE ) UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. RELIEF AND DAMAGES ) 4300 East 68th Street ) Cleveland, Ohio 44105 ) ) (Jury Demand Endorsed Herein) ) Defendant. ) ) Plaintiff, Sarah Turchon, by and through undersigned counsel, as her Complaint against Defendant, states and avers the following: INTRODUCTION 1. Turchon is a Cuyahoga County, Ohio resident. 2. Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”) is domestic corporation with a place of business located at 4300 East 68th Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44105. 3. UPS is an “employer” within the meaning of Ohio Rev. Code § 4112. 4. The conduct and injuries giving rise to the claims below arose in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. 5. Personal jurisdiction is proper over the Defendant pursuant to Ohio Revised Code §2307.382(A)(1) 6. Venue is proper pursuant to Civ.R. 3(B)(3). 7. This Court is a court of general jurisdiction over all subject matters of this Complaint and the claims presented herein. Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 3 of 8. PagelD #: 11 8. Within 300 days of the conduct alleged below, Plaintiff filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), specifically, Charge No. 532 2022-03509, which was dual filed with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (“OCRC”). 9. On April 24, 2023, Turchon received a Right to Sue letter, dismissing Charge No. 532-2022 03509, in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(l), attached as Exhibit A. 10. Turchon has properly exhausted her administrative remedies. 11. Turchon files this Complaint within 90 days of receiving her Right to Sue letter from the EEOC. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 12. Turchon incorporates by reference the allegations from the preceding paragraphs, as if fully restated herein. 13. Turchon is female. 14. Turchon was hired by UPS as a part-time driver in the “metro south” center located at 4300 E. 68th Street, Cleveland in May 2021. 15. Turchon put a bid in for a full-time position, and in February 2022, Turchon was told that she won the bid. 16. In February 2022, Turchon’s supervisor, Kevin Phillips informed Turchon that she would not get the full-time position for the metro south location. 17. Phillips initially texted Turchon that “there are some very unfortunate things I won’t text that you need to know.” 18. When Phillips and Turchon met in person the following Monday, Phillips stated that the manager of metro south, Jay (last name unknown), “doesn’t think a woman can handle” the full-time driver position. Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 4 of 8. PagelD #: 12 19. Turchon was never given a full-time driver position. 20. There were no female full-time drivers at the metro south location during Turchon’s employment. 21. Turchon was not offered the full-time driver position because she is female. 22. In April 2023, Turchon resigned her part-time position at UPS. COUNT: GENDER DISCRIMINATION 23. Turchon incorporates by reference the allegations from the preceding paragraphs, as if fully restated herein. 24. Turchon is female, as such, a member of a statutorily protected group, pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code §4112. 25. Throughout her employment, Turchon has been fully competent and qualified for her position with Defendants. 26. Ohio Rev. Code § 4112 provides that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to discriminate against an employee on the basis of the employee’s gender. 27. Defendant failed to promote Turchon to full-time because of Turchon’s gender, in contravention of Ohio Rev. Code § 4112. 28. As a direct result of Defendant’s unlawful conduct, Turchon suffered and continues to suffer pecuniary harm and emotional distress. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Plaintiff, Sarah Turchon, seeks judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000 to fully, fairly, and justly compensate her for injury, damage, and loss, and respectfully prays that this Court enter judgment in her favor and award her past economic and non-economic Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 5 of 8. PagelD #: 13 compensatory damages, fringe benefits, consequential damages, incidental damages, punitive damages, liquidated damages, interest, all reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and expenses, and any additional legal or equitable relief available under law, including, but not limited to back pay, future losses, reinstatement, and promotion. Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Claire I. Wade________ Claire I. Wade (0093174) Sobel, Wade & Mapley, LLC 55 Erieview Plaza, Suite 370 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 T:(216)223-7213 F:(216)223-7213 Wade@ swml awfirm. com Attorney for Plaintiff Sarah Turchon Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 6 of 8. PagelD #: 14 JURY DEMAND Plaintiff Sarah Turchon demands a trial by jury by the maximum number of jurors permitted. /s/ Claire I. Wade Claire I. Wade (0093174) Attorney for Plaintiff Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:08 / NOTICE 9 /9Z8M2r(aConfirmatHWIW.1 28ZB08Z / CLVXT Case: 1:23-cv-01157 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 7 of 8. PagelD #: 15 THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO Clerk of Courts | The Justice Center | 1200 Ontario Street 1st Floor, Cleveland, Ohio 44113 SARAH TURCHON CASE NO. OV23978942 Plaintiff JUDGE MAUREEN CLANCY V. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. SUMMONS SUMC CM Defendant Notice ID: 50547327 50547327 From: SARAH TURCHON P1 Atty.: CLAIRE I WADE 14409 SPRENGELAVE. 55 ERIEVIEW PLAZA CLEVELAND OH 44135 SUITE 370 CLEVELAND, OH 44114 To: UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. D1 4300 EAST 68TH STREET CLEVELAND OH 44105 NOTICE TO THE DEFENDANT: The Plaintiff has filed a lawsuit against you in this Court. You are named as a defendant. A copy of the Complaint is attached. If you wish to respond to the Complaint, you must deliver a written Answer to the Plaintiff’s attorney (or the Plaintiff if not represented by an attorney) at the above address within 28 days after receiving this Summons (not counting the day you received it). A letter or a phone call will not protect you. Civil Rule 5 explains the ways that you may deliver the Answer (http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/civil/CivilProcedure.pdf ) You must also file a copy of your Answer with this Court within 3 days after you serve it on the Plaintiff. You can file your Answer with the Clerk of Courts by one of the following methods: 1) In-person or by mail at the above address or 2) electronically through the online e-Filing system. For more information on using the e-Filing system, visit http://coc.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/efiling.aspx . If you fail to serve and file your Answer, you will lose valuable rights. The Court will decide the case in favor of the Plaintiff and grant the relief requested in the Complaint by entering a default judgment against you. You may wish to hire an attorney to represent you. Because this is a civil lawsuit, the Court cannot appoint an attorney for you. If you need help finding a lawyer, contact a local bar association and request assistance. Nailah K. Byrd Clerk of Court of Common Pleas 216-443-7950 Date Sent: 05/04/2023 By. Deputy CMSN130 Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT UNaTEfrSTAIOS-Sl Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 06/08/23 8 of 8. PagelD #: 16 POSTAL SERVICE Date Produced: 05/15/2023 CERTIFIED MAIL SOLUTIONS INC.: The following is the delivery information for Certified Mail™/RRE item number 9314 8001 1300 3548 2057 62. Our records indicate that this item was delivered on 05/11/2023 at 10:41 a.m. in CLEVELAND, OH 44105. The scanned image of the recipient information is provided below. Signature of Recipient: e / ,,<5^ Address of Recipient: Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional assistance, please contact your local post office or Postal Service representative. Sincerely, United States Postal Service The customer reference number shown below is not validated or endorsed by the United States Postal Service. It is solely for customer use. R^ed06/08/20m83fANOTlCE?^V(2Bi978942^0nfirmatfti2P0- P£ (b) The collection of dues when authorized by appropriate Local Union action; and (c) The transmission of such messages and information, which shall originate with, and are authorized by the Local Union or its officers, provided such messages and information: (1) have been reduced to writing; or (2) if not reduced to writing, are of a routine nature and do not in volve work stoppages, slowdowns, refusal to handle goods, or any other interference with the Employer's business. Job Stewards and alternates have no authority to take strike action or any other action interrupting the Employer's business, except as authorized by official action of the Local Union. The Employer rec ognizes these limitations upon the authorized Job Stewards and their alternates, and shall not hold the Union liable for any unautho rized acts. The Employer in so recognizing such limitations shall have the authority to impose proper, nondiscriminatory discipline, including discharge. However, in the event the Job Steward or the designated alternate has led, or instigated or encouraged unautho rized strike action, slowdown or work stoppages in violation of this Agreement he/she may be singled out for more serious discipline, up to and including discharge. Stewards and/or alternate stewards shall not be subject to discipline for performing any of the duties within the scope of their authority as defined in this Section, in the manner permitted by this Section. Recognizing the importance of the role of the Union Steward in resolving problems or disputes between the Employer and its em ployees, the Employer reaffirms its commitment to the active in volvement of union stewards in such processes in accordance with the terms of this Article. The Job Steward or the designated alternate shall be permitted rea sonable time to investigate, present and process grievances on the Company's property without interruption of the Employer's opera tion. Upon notification to his or her supervisor, a steward shall be - 13 - Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT -cv-G^T* Doc #■ 1-2 Filed: 06/08/23 24 of 200. P£ afforded the right to leave his/her work area for a reasonable period of time to investigate, present and process grievances and to repre sent a fellow employee concerning grievances or discipline so long as such activity does not interrupt the Employer's operations. This shall include the steward's right to represent an employee in con nection with any grievance concerning safety issues. The Employer will make a reasonable effort to insure that its operations are not interrupted by the steward's engaging in such activity. The Employ er shall not use interruption of its operation as a subterfuge for de nying such right to the steward. Where mutually agreed to by the Local Union and Employer, stew ards may investigate off the property or other than during their reg ular schedule, without loss of time or pay. Stewards will be paid for time spent in meetings under this Article which occur during the steward's regular working hours. Stewards shall also be paid for time spent in meetings which occur outside his or her working hours, or on days off, by mutual consent. Such time spent during the Job Steward's or the designated alternate's regular working hours shall be considered working hours in computing daily and/or weekly overtime if within the regular schedule of the Job Steward or the designated alternate. The Employer recognizes the employee's right to be given request ed representation by a Steward, or the designated alternate, at such time as the employee reasonably contemplates disciplinary action. The Employer also recognizes the steward's right to be given re quested representation by another Steward, or the designated alter nate, at such time as the Steward reasonably contemplates disci plinary action. When requested by the Union or the employee, there shall be a steward present whenever the Employer meets with an employee concerning grievances or discipline or investigatory in terviews. In such cases, the meeting shall not be continued until the steward or alternate steward is present. If an employee does not wish to have a Union Steward in any meet ing where the employee has a right to Union representation under this Article, the employee shall sign a waiver of Union representation, a copy of which shall be furnished to the Union upon its request. - 14 - Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT -CV-01157 Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 06/08/23 25 £>fti2P0- P£ If requested by the Local Union, the designated Stewards will be provided with copies of all warning, suspension and discharge let ters. If a supplement has no provision allowing a Local Union to request documents/information with regard to pending grievances, the following shall be incorporated into the Supplement: “The Em ployer shall, upon written request, provide the Local Union or the steward designated by the Local Union, with documents/informa- tion that is reasonably related (based on NLRA standards) to the pending grievance.” Job Stewards, or designated alternates, shall be allowed to wear an identifying steward's badge, provided by the Union, at all times while on the Employer's premises. ARTICLE 5. SANITARY CONDITIONS The Employer agrees to maintain a clean, sanitary washroom having hot and cold running water with toilet facilities in all present and fu ture buildings. The Employer further agrees to provide separate toilet and changing facilities for male and female employees in all present and future UPS buildings which have more than fifteen (15) drivers. The Employer shall implement procedures designed to ensure pri vacy for all employees when using facilities in UPS buildings with fifteen (15) or fewer drivers. Such toilet facilities will be equipped with proper ventilation devic es and shall be heated as climatic conditions shall warrant. The Employer agrees to provide lockers for those employees who are required to change into a uniform or take a lunch period. All other employees will be provided a suitable area for keeping per sonal items and clothes. Assigned lockers will not be opened by the Employer unless either the employee or a Union representative is present. Where the Employer and the Union agree that the local water is not suitable for drinking, the Employer will provide bottled drinking water. - 15 - Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31 / NOTICE / CV 23 978942 / Confirmation Nbr. 2879097 / CLVXT -cv-0^£76 Doc #: 1-2 Filed: 06/08/23 26 of 200. Pa ARTICLE 6. Section 1. Extra Contract Agreements Except as may be otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Em ployer agrees not to enter into, or attempt to enter into, any agree ment or contract with its employees, either individually or collec tively, or to require or attempt to require employees to sign any document, either individually or collectively, which in any way conflicts with the provisions of this Agreement. Any such Agree ment or document shall be null and void. Any such agreement or document may not be placed in an employee's file or used by the Employer as a basis for discipline or used in connection with any disciplinary proceeding, nor may any such agreement or document nor the contents thereof be divulged to any person or entity. In addition, the Company will not discipline an employee for refus ing to sign any Company form related to the principle of a fair day's work unless the signing is required by law or by this Agreement. Section 2. Workweek Reduction If either the Fair Labor Standards Act or the Hours of Service Reg ulations are subsequently amended so as to result in substantial penalties to either the employees or the Employer, a written notice shall be sent by either party requesting negotiations to amend those provisions which are affected. Thereafter the parties shall enter into immediate negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually satisfactory solution. In the event the parties cannot agree on a solu tion within sixty (60) days, or mutually agreed extensions thereof after receipt of the stated written notice, either party shall be al lowed economic recourse. Section 3. New Equipment Where new types of equipment and/or operations, for which rates of pay are not established by this Agreement, are put into use after the ratification date of this Agreement within operations covered by this Agreement, rates governing such operations shall be subject to negotiations between the parties. This paragraph shall apply to all new types of equipment including office and clerical equipment. In - 16 - Electronically Filed 06/08/2023 18:31