2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 1 of 19 Pg ID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
___________

BEVERLY L. SWANIGAN, Case No.

BRIAN LEE KELLER, and Hon.
SHERI ANOLICK, individually Magistrate
and on behalf of others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,
vs.

FCA US, LLC, a foreign limited

liability company,

and

INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED

AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND
AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF AMERICA (“UAW”),
jointly and severally,

Defendants.
/
Raymond J. Sterling (P34456)
James C. Baker (P62668)
Brian J. Farrar (P79404)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
STERLING ATTORNEYS AT LAW, P.C.
33 Bloomfield Hills Pkwy., Ste. 250
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304
(248) 644-1500
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
/

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 2 of 19 Pg ID 2

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiffs bring this hybrid § 301 claim against FCA US, LLC

(“FCA”) and/or its predecessors and International Union, United Automobile,

Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (“UAW”).

2. FCA and the UAW engaged in collusion when FCA bribed the

UAW to obtain company-friendly positions at the bargaining table and

elsewhere; bribes which the UAW accepted, to the detriment of plaintiffs and

the proposed class.

3. Plaintiffs are employees of Defendant FCA US, LLC (“FCA”)

and/or its predecessors and are dues-paying members of defendant International

Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of

America (the “UAW” or the “Union”).

4. Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated,

bring this action against FCA for breaches of collectively bargained agreements

pursuant to the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 USC 185 (“LMRA”)

resulting from the illegal and overt acts of FCA by itself and by its designated

agent(s) in violation of 29 USC 186.

5. Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated,

bring this action against their labor union, the UAW, pursuant to Section 301 of

2
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 3 of 19 Pg ID 3

the LMRA (codified at 29 USC 185) for violations and breaches of its duty of

fair representation by accepting money, gifts, bribes, and other prohibited

payments to bargain away plaintiffs’ rights, and the rights of other similarly

situated individuals, and to engage in other improper acts, including the

improper use of Union dues for purposes other than the purposes intended.

THE PLAINTIFFS

6. Plaintiff Beverly L. Swanigan, an individual residing in Clinton

Township, Macomb County, Michigan, is a citizen and resident of Michigan.

7. Plaintiff Brian Lee Keller, an individual residing in Mount Clemens,

Macomb County, Michigan, is a citizen and resident of Michigan.

8. Plaintiff Sheri Anolick, an individual residing in Garden City,

Wayne County, Michigan, is a citizen and resident of Michigan.

9. The potential class members who are similarly situated to plaintiffs

include all dues paying FCA employees who were dues paying UAW members

impacted by the illegal, improper, and collusive conduct of FCA and the UAW

in violation of the LMRA.

THE DEFENDANTS

10. Defendant FCA is a foreign limited liability company organized

under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in

Auburn Hills, Oakland County, Michigan.

3
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 4 of 19 Pg ID 4

11. Defendant UAW is a labor organization as the term is defined by

the NLRA, 29 USC 152(5), and plaintiffs’ exclusive bargaining representative

under the NLRA, 29 USC 159(a).

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

12. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure, on behalf of the class defined as follows: all past and current

employees of defendant FCA who were dues paying members of the UAW

impacted by the illegal, improper, and collusive conduct of FCA and the UAW

in violation of the LMRA.

13. The members of the class are so numerous that joinder is

impractical, if not impossible.

14. The members of the class can be identified easily through a review

of the business records of FCA and the UAW.

15. There are common questions of fact and law affecting all class

members that arise as a result of the allegations in this complaint.

16. The plaintiffs’ claims are typical of all members of the class as they

were members of the UAW and paid dues for the purpose of having the UAW

negotiate with FCA in good faith and on their behalf, they have been adversely

impacted by the actions of FCA and the UAW arising from the illegal and

collusive conduct, and have been adversely impacted by the collective

4
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 5 of 19 Pg ID 5

bargaining agreements negotiated in violation of the duties of FCA and the

UAW as prescribed by the LMRA.

17. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the

proposed class as they are injured employees of FCA and injured members of

the UAW.

18. A class action is a superior method of resolution to the other

available methods for a fair, efficient, and just resolution of this controversy.

19. The expense and burden of individual litigation are impediments to

class members’ seeking relief for the wrongful conduct alleged.

20. This action is maintainable under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure because common questions of fact and law predominate over

questions affecting only individual class members (individual questions focus

almost exclusively on the amount of damages owed in the form of dues paid by

the class members, and other compensation, including compensatory damages,

punitive damages, and interest).

21. The amount in controversy with respect to each individual member

of the class is relatively modest when compared to the costly prosecution of

separate actions.

22. Plaintiffs have retained the undersigned counsel for these purposes,

who are experienced in employment and class action litigation.

5
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 6 of 19 Pg ID 6

JURISDICTION

23. This action arises from plaintiffs’ employment with FCA, and

membership with the UAW.

24. Although employment numbers varied slightly over time, FCA

employs, and the UAW represents, tens of thousands of union workers.

25. This Court has personal jurisdiction over defendants because the

claims arise from the transaction of business, the negotiation of collectively

bargained agreements, and other conduct between the defendants, all of which

occurred in this State.

26. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to: 28 USC 1331

because the claims arise under the laws of the United States; 28 USC 1337(a)

because the claims arise under an Act of Congress regulating commerce; and 29

USC 185 because the claims concern the violation of contracts and/or contract

negotiations between an employer and labor organization.

27. To the extent the claims allege violations of state law, this Court has

supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims pursuant to 28 USC 1367,

because those claims are so related to the claims arising under federal law that

they form part of the same case or controversy.

VENUE

28. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 USC 1391 because both FCA and

the UAW have principal places of business in this judicial district and all of the
6
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 7 of 19 Pg ID 7

events, omissions, or occurrences giving rise to the lawsuit took place in this

district.

THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS

29. In 2009, Chrysler (the predecessor to FCA), emerged from

bankruptcy protection.

30. Upon emerging from bankruptcy, the UAW pension fund, Fiat

S.p.A. (an Italian automaker), and the United States and Canadian governments

became the principal owners.

31. Since 2009, Fiat has gradually acquired the other parties’ shares and

the Chrysler brand is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of defendant FCA US,

LLC.

32. The UAW is one of the largest labor organizations in the United

States and has historically represented Chrysler and FCA hourly workers.

33. The UAW is a hierarchical organization governed by the

Constitution of the International UAW.

34. In the United States, collective bargaining agreements between the

UAW and the “Big 3” automobile manufacturers (General Motors, Ford, and

Chrysler/FCA) are negotiated approximately every four years.1

1
Since emergence from bankruptcy, Chrysler bargained with the UAW in 2009,
then again in 2011, and most recently in 2015.
7
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 8 of 19 Pg ID 8

35. Negotiations of the most recent master collective bargaining

agreement between FCA and the UAW began in or around June 2015, with the

final agreement completed sometime later in 2015.

36. The International UAW and FCA have also, from time to time,

negotiated other agreements, including pension and bonus agreements, as well

as an agreement negotiated and completed in 2014 whereby the International

UAW purchased the equity held by the UAW Retirees Medical Benefits Trust

in Chrysler Group LLC (subsequently FCA) for billions of dollars.

37. The collective bargaining agreements described in the preceding

paragraphs contemplate additional agreements between UAW Local Unions

and FCA management concerning matters specific to those locals, so long as

those agreements are consistent with the master collective bargaining

agreements bargained for between the International Union and FCA.

38. The UAW’s membership, of which plaintiffs and the class are

members, pay periodic dues, the substantial majority of which are designated to

be used in the bargaining process.

39. FCA designates a number of its employees, including officers,

directors, and senior executives, to represent FCA in the master collective

bargaining discussions; these designees are the agents of FCA empowered and

authorized to negotiate on behalf of FCA.

8
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 9 of 19 Pg ID 9

40. Between 2009 and approximately June 2015, FCA designated

Alphons Iacobelli (“Iacobelli”), its Vice President of Labor Relations, to be its

lead representative for managing FCA’s contractual relationship with the UAW.

41. The UAW similarly designates a number of its employees,

including officers, directors, and senior executives, to represent the UAW and

its membership in the master collective bargaining process; these designees are

the agents of the Union authorized to negotiate on behalf of UAW and its

membership.

42. Between 2009 and early 2015, the UAW designated its officer

General Holiefield (“Holiefield”) to be its lead representative for managing

UAW’s contractual relationship with FCA.

43. From 2012 through the 2015 collective bargaining process, one of

the UAW’s designees, who was senior in the negotiating process and

relationship with FCA, was Virdell King (“King”).

THE COLLUSION BETWEEN FCA AND THE UAW

44. Based on the sworn statement of FCA’s Vice President Alphons

Iacobelli, “Between in or before January 2009 and continuing through or after

June 2015, [I] knowingly and voluntarily joined a conspiracy in which FCA and

FCA executives and FCA employees agree to pay and deliver, and willfully paid

and delivered, money and things of value to officers and employees of the

UAW,” including Holiefield and King. January 15, 2018 Rule 11 Plea
9
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 10 of 19 Pg ID 10

Agreement of Alphons Iacobelli, Eastern District of Michigan Case No. 2:17-cr-

20406.

45. Iacobelli admitted to performing these prohibited acts with “FCA

and other co-conspirators” while “acting in the interest of employer FCA.”

46. Iacobelli also admitted that “Over the course of the conspiracy,

[Iacobelli], FCA” and other yet-to-be-named FCA director(s), senior

manager(s), executives, and employees, “unlawfully paid and delivered more

than $1.5 million in prohibited payments and things of value directly and

indirectly to” Holiefield, King, and other yet-to-be-named UAW officials.

47. Over the course of the conspiracy, FCA transferred prohibited

payments and things of value to UAW officers and employees, per Iacobelli, “in

an effort to obtain benefits, concessions, and advantages for FCA in the

negotiation, implementation, and administration of collective bargaining

agreements between FCA and the UAW.”

48. In or before December 2013, Iacobelli provided Holiefield with a

script in advance of a meeting between Holiefield and other members of the

International UAW’s executive board, during which the UAW was considering

expending billions of dollars to purchase the equity interest held by the UAW

Retiree Medical Benefits Trust in Chrysler Group, LLC.

10
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 11 of 19 Pg ID 11

49. The purchase was completed in January 2014, using in substantial

part the dues paid by UAW members to finance the billions paid for the equity

interest in FCA.

50. The illegal and collusive relationship between Iacobelli and

Holiefield led to the script that Holiefield relied upon to encourage the UAW’s

executive board to spend billions of dollars on the purchase of the equity interest

in FCA.

51. The conspiracy of collusion makes it reasonable to conclude that the

purchase price arrived at between FCA and the UAW was not negotiated at

arm’s length, was not a legitimate bargained-for exchange, and was overvalued

to the benefit of FCA and to the detriment of the UAW’s membership.

52. The result was that in all likelihood, the UAW’s membership paid

tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars in Union dues for a transaction tainted

by the conspiracy between FCA and the UAW.

53. Additionally, during the ongoing conspiracy, the UAW’s dues-

paying membership paid a substantial percentage of periodic dues to the UAW

so that the Union would engage in good faith and honest negotiations with FCA.

54. As a result of the conspiracy, the Union acted on improper

motivations or in a manner which is contrary to its arbitrary, perfunctory, or

inexcusably neglectful.

11
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 12 of 19 Pg ID 12

55. From at least 2012 through 2016, per the sworn statement of Union

officer Virdell King, after the 2015 master collective bargaining agreement was

finalized between FCA and the UAW, King “knowingly joined a conspiracy

where officers and employees of the UAW would willfully request, receive, and

accept – and agree to receive and accept – money and things of value” from

persons acting in the interest of FCA. During that time, FCA was the employer

of tens of thousands of employees represented by the UAW.” August 17, 2017

Rule 11 Plea Agreement of Virdell King; Eastern District of Michigan Case No.

2:17-cr-20406.

56. Per King, she “was a UAW employee who served as a senior official

in the UAW Chrysler Department from 2008 until … February 2016. As a senior

UAW official … King was responsible for negotiating and administering the

collective bargaining agreements between the UAW and FCA on behalf of tens

of thousands of FCA employees represented by the UAW” who were dues

paying members of the UAW, whose dues in substantial part were used in the

bargaining process.

57. According to King, “In 2011 and 2015, King served as a member of

the UAW national negotiating committee responsible for the collective

bargaining agreements between the UAW and FCA.”

58. Holiefield, King, and other yet-to-be-named UAW senior officials

participated in the conspiracy that included FCA making payments that were
12
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 13 of 19 Pg ID 13

intended to obtain benefits, concessions, and advantages for FCA in the

negotiation, implementation, and administration of collective bargaining

agreements between FCA and the UAW.

59. The requesting, receiving, accepting, and agreeing to receive and

accept money, gifts, things of value, and prohibited payments caused FCA to

obtain benefits, concessions, and advantages for FCA in the negotiation,

implementation, and administration of collective bargaining agreements

between FCA and the UAW as well as to cause UAW to pay a substantially

higher price for the purchase of an equity interest in Chrysler Group, LLC

(subsequently FCA).

60. Iacobelli and King have both pled guilty to conspiracy to violate the

LMRA, 29 USC 186; Holiefield is deceased.

61. Other FCA and UAW officials engaged in the ongoing conspiracy

have yet to be named through supplemental criminal indictments, despite

having been identified by numeric monikers in the existing indictments and

Iacobelli’s and King’s Rule 11 Plea Agreements.

62. The conspiracy to violate the LMRA by both FCA and the UAW

has resulted in tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars in Union dues not

being used for the intended purpose: bargaining for the benefit of the Union

members.

13
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 14 of 19 Pg ID 14

63. All collective bargaining agreements, with letters, other agreements,

and supporting documents are in the possession of FCA and the UAW.

64. Plaintiffs were unable to reasonably discover FCA’s violation of the

LMRA and the UAW’s breach of its duty of fair representation until the public

issuance of federal indictments against Iacobelli on July 26, 2017 and King on

August 8, 2017.

65. Plaintiffs had no way of knowing about the details or extent of the

conspiracy, including the levels of involvement of FCA, the UAW, and its

respective officers, directors, managers, senior executives, executives, and

employees, until the public filing of King’s August 17, 2017 Rule 11 Plea

Agreement and Iacobelli’s January 15, 2018 Rule 11 Plea Agreement.

COUNT I
VIOLATION OF THE
LABOR MANAGEMENT RELATIONS ACT

66. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding paragraphs by reference.

67. FCA unlawfully paid bribes to executives of the UAW to take FCA-

friendly positions during collecting bargaining negotiations, including those in

2011 and 2015.

68. FCA’s unlawful conduct violated the LMRA in that two or more

persons conspired in violation of 29 USC 186.

14
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 15 of 19 Pg ID 15

69. FCA, through the acts of its designated agents, who included

officers, directors, senior managers, and executives, knowingly and voluntarily

joined the conspiracy.

70. Members of the conspiracy made prohibited payments with the

intention of impermissibly influencing the collective bargaining process.

71. The prohibited payments did impermissibly influence the collective

bargaining process by allowing FCA to obtain company-friendly concessions

from the UAW during the collective bargaining process.

72. The prohibited payments caused at least one designated agent of the

UAW, a co-conspirator with FCA, to direct and/or impermissibly influence the

decision of the UAW Executive Board to expend billions of dollars in the non-

arm’s length purchase of an equity interest in FCA.

73. As a result of FCA’s violation of the LMRA, plaintiffs and other

class members have been harmed in that potentially hundreds of millions of

dollars of their dues paid to the UAW for the purposes of good-faith negotiations

have instead been spent on tainted and/or illegal collective bargaining

negotiations.

74. As a result of FCA’s violation of the LMRA, plaintiffs’ and other

class members’ dues have not been spent for the purposes of good-faith

negotiations but instead on a multi-billion dollars non-arm’s length, overvalued

purchase of equity in FCA.

15
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 16 of 19 Pg ID 16

COUNT II
BREACH OF THE DUTY OF
FAIR REPRESENTATION UNDER THE LMRA

75. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding paragraphs by reference.

76. The UAW engaged in willfully requesting, receiving, accepting, and

agreeing to receive and accept, money and things of value from persons acting

in the interest of FCA.

77. The UAW gave authority to its designated agents, including

Holiefield and King, among others, to represent its members who were

employees of FCA.

78. The UAW had an obligation to serve the interests of all members

without favoritism to the company, and/or without favoritism or hostility to any

members, to exercise its representational discretion with complete good faith

and honesty, and to avoid arbitrary conduct.

79. The UAW breached its duty to its membership, by acting based

upon the improper motivation of FCA’s bribery, and the UAW’s requesting and

receiving prohibited payments and things of value.

80. The UAW’s representation of its membership was arbitrary,

perfunctory, or inexcusably neglectful.

81. By its involvement in the FCA conspiracy, the UAW, through its

designated agents, lacked a rational basis for decision-making within the

16
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 17 of 19 Pg ID 17

bargaining process, and engaged in egregious unfairness or reckless disregard for

its members’ rights.

82. By its involvement in the FCA/UAW conspiracy, the UAW,

through its designated agents, lacked a rational basis for decision-making when

it chose to expend millions of dollars of its members’ dues in the tainted

bargaining process.

83. By its involvement in the conspiracy, the UAW, through its

designated agents, lacked a rational basis for decision making and acted

egregiously neglectful when it expended billions of dollars of its membership’s

dues on a non-arm’s length purchase of an equity interest in FCA.

84. By the multiple UAW actors in the FCA conspiracy, the UAW

failed in its duty to investigate the actions of its designated agents, to the

detriment of its members’ rights, and to the expense of its membership through

hundreds of millions of dollars of dues having been wasted on tainted

bargaining.

85. As a result of the UAW’s breach of its duty of fair representation,

plaintiffs and other class members have been harmed in that hundreds of

millions of dollars of their dues paid to the UAW, spent for the purposes of good-

faith negotiations, have been spent on a multi-billion dollars non-arm’s length,

overvalued purchase of an equity interest in FCA.

17
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 18 of 19 Pg ID 18

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and others similarly

situated, respectfully request that a money judgment be entered against

defendants, jointly and severally, or by statutory apportionment, for an amount

to be determined by a jury to compensate them for their damages and specifically

request the following:

A. That this Court, as soon as practicable, certify the Class and appoint

the undersigned to represent it;

B. That this Court award damages in an amount to be determined by

a jury, including reimbursement of the value of all dues paid during

the conspiracy period by the UAW membership who were or are

FCA employees;

C. That this Court award damages in an amount to be determined by

a jury to compensate plaintiffs and the Class for the value of those

dues paid which were spent on the UAW’s non-arm’s length,

overvalued purchase of an equity interest in FCA;

D. That this Court exercise its legal and equitable power by ordering

FCA to repay plaintiffs and the class the excess value the UAW paid

for the equity interest;

E. That this Court grant any injunctive relief it determines is necessary

to protect the claims of the plaintiffs and the class;

18
 2:18-cv-10319-JCO-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 01/26/18 Pg 19 of 19 Pg ID 19

F. That this Court award plaintiffs and the Class any additional

damages it determines are reasonable and appropriate as

compensatory damages, punitive damages, and interest;

G. That this Court award reasonable attorney fees, costs and expenses,

and expert witness fees; and

H. That this Court award whatever additional monetary relief that may

be available in law and equity.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs, by themselves and as representatives of the Class, respectfully

demand a trial by jury as to all issues.

Respectfully submitted,

STERLING ATTORNEYS AT LAW, P.C.

By: /s/ Raymond J. Sterling

Raymond J. Sterling (P34456)
James C. Baker (P62668)
Brian J. Farrar (P79404)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
33 Bloomfield Hills Pkwy., Ste. 250
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304
Dated: January 26, 2018 (248) 644-1500

19