ANCHORAGE (LN) — U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason on Thursday granted former Northern Air Cargo pilot Jeremy Wood’s request to select his own legal representative for a court-ordered arbitration, ruling that the Railway Labor Act’s statutory guarantee of individual arbitration access cannot be conditioned on accepting the union’s chosen counsel.
Gleason’s order resolves a dispute between Wood, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and Northern Air Cargo regarding the procedural mechanics of Wood’s statutory right to arbitrate his wrongful termination claim.
The case stems from Wood’s second termination in April 2022. After the Teamsters declined to proceed with his grievance, Wood sued to compel arbitration before an impartial System Board of Adjustment, arguing that airline employees possess an individual statutory right under the Railway Labor Act to access arbitration with or without the union as a party.
Gleason previously denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss, holding that individuals have a statutory right to pursue arbitration pursuant to 45 U.S.C. § 184. She later ruled that Wood could compel arbitration before a three-member System Board, rejecting the union’s argument that he was limited to nonprecedential forums under American Arbitration Association rules.
In the latest order, Gleason addressed Wood’s motion to enforce his rights and for contempt, after the defendants refused to schedule the arbitration.
Wood sought to hold the defendants in contempt for failing to schedule the hearing within 180 days, asserting they willfully disobeyed the court’s prior orders. The defendants argued their October 16 order contained no explicit directive to schedule the arbitration and that they were acting on a good faith interpretation that immediate action was not mandated.
Gleason denied the contempt motion, finding that the prior order lacked the "specific and definite" language required for a contempt finding. However, she issued a new, unequivocal order directing the defendants to schedule the hearing within 180 days.
The ruling on Wood’s right to select his own counsel was the other major outcome. The Teamsters argued that Wood could not contravene the collective bargaining agreement’s provision that the union designates who presents arguments on behalf of a grievant. They cited Ninth Circuit precedent from Carr v. Pacific Maritime Association and Bautista v. Pan American World Airlines, Inc. to argue that Wood could not circumvent contractual dispute resolution procedures.
Gleason distinguished those cases, noting that Wood had already exhausted contractual remedies when the union declined to proceed with his grievance. She ruled that his invocation of the RLA’s statutory framework was not an attempt to circumvent procedures, but rather an exercise of a right that exists independently of the contract.
"The CBA is a contract between NAC and the Unions, to which Mr. Wood is not a party," Gleason wrote. "Individual employee's rights cannot be nullified merely by agreement between the carrier and the union."
She concluded that Wood’s right to select his own counsel at his own expense was necessary to ensure "meaningful access" to his statutory arbitration rights.
Wood also requested attorney’s fees associated with the motion, but Gleason denied that request, noting that because she found no civil contempt, there was no basis for a fee award under the cited precedent.
The order mandates that the System Board be composed of one member chosen, one chosen by Northern Air Cargo, and one neutral arbitrator.