1509 Patterson v. Local Union 848

The Local presented Patterson’s arguments to the Company, but it was not persuaded to change its position. The Local Union’s determination that the Company’s position could not be successfully challenged was based on the experience of former Committeemen and the established past practice. Patterson’s claim that the Union’s decision to accept the Company’s interpretation amounted to discrimination against second shift employees is not the sort of claim over which we have jurisdiction. We are authorized by the Constitution to consider claims of discrimination against protected classes of employees, but not the disadvantages arising out of negotiated contractual arrangements.