The following excerpt is from Bruccheri v. Aramark Unif. Servs., LLC, No. 2:18-cv-00119-KJM-KJN (E.D. Cal. 2018):
Nevertheless, "not every dispute concerning employment, or tangentially involving a provision of a collective-bargaining agreement, is preempted by 301." Id. at 211. If a state law provides rights that cannot be waived or modified by private contract, and if the rights can be enforced without resort to the express or implied terms of the contract, 301 preemption does not apply to claims brought under that state law. See id. at 212 ("In extending the pre-emptive effect of 301 beyond suits for breach of contract, it would be inconsistent with congressional intent under that section to preempt state rules that proscribe conduct, or establish rights and obligations, independent of a labor contract.") (footnote omitted); Miller v. AT & T Network Sys., 850 F.2d 543, 545-46 (9th Cir. 1988).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.