Even accepting as true the plaintiff's allegation that Local 804 did not “invoke” Article 7 of the NMA or Article 12 of the Supplemental Agreement, that failure “does not imply bad faith, but rather error or mere negligence.” Felton v. Loc. Union 804, Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, No. 17-CV-2309, 2019 WL 1046952, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2019) (citing Barr, 868 F.2d at 43 (“[F]ailure to prepare adequately for arbitration does not rise to the level of arbitrariness or bad faith.”)).
Bejjani v. Manhattan Sheraton Corp., No. 12-CV-6618 (JPO), 2013 WL 3237845, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. June 27, 2013). Plaintiff's claim that the Union acted in bad faith- and thus breached its duty of fair representation-by conspiring with Interfaith thus cannot survive Union defendants' motion to dismiss.Id.; see also Sahni v. Staff Att'ys Ass'n, No. 14-CV-9873 (NSR), 2016 WL 1241524, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 23, 2016) (dismissing plaintiff's arbitration-related duty of fair representation claims where the plaintiff alleged that the union and the employer “colluded to delay arbitration” of the plaintiff's grievances but “ma[de] no effort to allege an explanation as to” why or how they colluded); Felton v. Loc. Union 804, Int'l Brotherhood of Teamsters, Nos. 17-CV-2309 & 17-CV-4803 (AMD), 2019 WL 1046952, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2019) (“The plaintiff offers nothing more than conclusory allegations that the Union acted arbitrarily and in bad faith; without specifying supporting facts to show a union's lack of good faith, the complaint fails to state a valid claim.” (citation and alterations omitted)). For the same reason, plaintiff cannot base her hybrid claim on the unsupported allegation that Local 1199 “aid[ed] and abet[ed]” Interfaith defendants' “scheme . . . to discharge [plaintiff] for false pretextual reasons.”
At most, Local 804 was negligent in its investigation as to whether Plaintiff had worked the requisite forty days, and a union's negligence is insufficient to plausibly allege a duty of fair representation claim. See Felton v. Local Union 804, Int'l Brotherhood of Teamsters, No. 17-CV-2309, 17-CV-4803, 2019 WL 1046952, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2019) (dismissing the plaintiff's hybrid section 301 claim where the plaintiff alleged that the union failed to invoke certain articles of the collective bargaining agreement because "[t]he [u]nion's decision . . . does not imply bad faith, but rather error or mere negligence"). Plaintiff also seeks leave to add a claim under section 7114(a)(1), alleging that Local 804 violated the duty of fair representation under this statute.