Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
MASSEY v. ILLINOIS RANGE COMPANY
May 17, 1973
WALTER C. MASSEY, PLAINTIFF,
ILLINOIS RANGE COMPANY, AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION, AND SHEET METAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 115, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Bauer, District Judge.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause comes on the motion of defendant Sheet Metal
Workers International Association, Local Union No. 115
("Union") to dismiss the complaint.
This is an action to redress an alleged deprivation of the
plaintiff's civil rights to equal employment opportunities
pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et
seq., and 1870, 42 U.S.C. § 1981. This Court is alleged to have
jurisdiction over the instant action pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1343(4), 2201 and 2202 and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f).
The plaintiff, Walter C. Massey, is an American Indian, a
United States citizen and a resident of Chicago, Illinois. The
defendant Illinois Range Company ("Employer") employed the
plaintiff at the time of the alleged discrimination and is an
employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b). The
defendant Union is a labor organization within the meaning of
42 U.S.C. § 2000e(d) and (e).
The plaintiff in his complaint alleges inter alia the
1. On October 28, 1963, plaintiff was hired by
the defendant company. At various times
during the course of his employment,
plaintiff was harassed, intimidated and
ridiculed by certain co-workers.
2. On or about November 28, 1968 plaintiff filed
a racial discrimination charge against
defendant company, based on the
abovementioned actions of his co-workers.
This charge was subsequently withdrawn by the
plaintiff after supervisors of defendant
company assured plaintiff that the harassment
by his co-workers would be stopped.
4. The plaintiff telephoned Mr. Grayson on June
25, 1970 and was informed that the strike had
been settled and that the employees had
rturned to work on June 24, 1970. On June 26,
1970 plaintiff telephoned defendant company
and was informed by the plant superintendent
that his employment had been terminated. The
termination of the plaintiff's employment was
based solely on plaintiff's being an American
Indian and plaintiff's previous filing of a
discrimination charge against the defendant
Employer. The defendant Union acquiesced and
joined with the defendant Employer in the
unlawful and discriminatory acts in that,
contrary to its duty and obligations to
plaintiff as a member of the Union and though
requested by the plaintiff, the Union failed
to aid plaintiff and discouraged plaintiff
from filing a grievance against defendant
Employer and refused to provide plaintiff
with the representation to which he was
entitled pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of
5. On July 6, 1970 and within ninety days of the
alleged discriminatory acts, the plaintiff
filed written charges under oath with the
Equal Opportunity Commission, alleging denial
by the defendants of his rights under Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. On or
about October 13, 1971 plaintiff was notified
by the EEOC that he was entitled to institute
a civil action in the U.S. District Court
against the defendant. The plaintiff
instituted the instant action within 30 days
after the receipt of such notice.
The plaintiff seeks to restrain the defendants from
discriminating against him and to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, appropriate payment of back wages, and the
cost of maintaining this action.
The defendant Union in support of its motion to dismiss
1. Plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of
42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)-2(c) [§ 2000e-2(c)].
2. Plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of
Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations
Buy This Entire Record For