This case involves federal preemption of claims by union employees that they are entitled to overtime pay under state law for work they did under a collective bargaining agreement. The NAM filed an amicus brief 3/1/2000 urging the court to reverse a Washington Supreme Court decision that would allow a class action, worth at least $40 million in this case, to proceed on the theory that baker-salespersons are not "outside salespersons" under state law. The NAM’s brief cites federal precedent that local claims involving the interpretation of collective bargaining agreements are preempted. The Supreme Court declined to review the case.
The case has implications for any unionized company with an agreement that defines, either explicitly or implicitly, certain employees as exempt or not exempt from the overtime laws. Preemption applies whenever the remedies sought, such as overtime pay, depend on or are inextricably intertwined with an interpretation of the provisions of the collective bargaining agreement.
If a company and a union agree to classify certain employees as salespersons, union employees should not be able to enjoy the benefits of the contract, then sue later, claiming they didn't like the contract.