Court Refuses To Extend Camargo v. California Portland Cement Co. To Avoid Preclusive Effect Of Arbitration Award
Camargo v. California Portland Cement Co., 86 Cal.App.4th 995 (2001) holds a labor arbitration pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) has no preclusive effect on a claim pursuant to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), unless the parties expressly agreed to arbitrate the FEHA claims. Does this holding also extend to common law claims related to FEHA, such as a claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy? No,says the Court of Appeal in Wade v. Ports America Management Corp., Case No. B238224 (2nd Dist. Div. 4 August 2, 2013) (Manella, J., author 3:0) (published). The Court in Wade holds a labor arbitration award pursuant to a CBA may preclude nonstatutory employment discrimination claims, reasoning that without preclusion, a plaintiff could benefit from the FEHA statutory scheme without complying with its prerequisites.
The only remaining issue was whether the cause of action was the same in both the arbitration and superior court proceedings, such that the arbitration award had res judicata effect. On the record, “appellant asserted a single primary right: his right not to be discharged for wrongful reasons.” The sole injury for which he sought relief was termination. One right, one remedy -- res judicata did apply here. Thus, plaintiff’s common law claims were precluded by the res judicata effect of the arbitration award, because the Court refused to extend Camargo to preclude such common law claims.
Comments