RIETH-RILEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, LOCAL 324, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO - Articles

All Content

RIETH-RILEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, LOCAL 324, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Apr 8, 2026

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Brian J. Paul, FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Rieth-Riley.

Attorneys 2: Eric Weitz, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D.C., for the NLRB. Amy E. Bachelder, LOCAL 324, IUOE, AFL-CIO, Bloomfield Township, Michigan, for Intervenor.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Brian J. Paul, Stuart R. Buttrick, Ryan J. Funk, Alexander E. Preller, FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Rieth-Riley.

Attorneys 4: Eric Weitz, Ruth E. Burdick, Amy Ginn, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D.C., for the NLRB. Amy E. Bachelder, LOCAL 324, IUOE, AFL-CIO, Bloomfield Township, Michigan, for Intervenor.

Judge(s): MOORE, COLE, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board

MATHIS, Circuit Judge. Rieth-Riley Construction Company and the union representative for some of its workers have been in a nearly decade-long conflict. The dispute began in 2018 when Local 324, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO (the “Union”), sought to withdraw from a multiemployer bargaining arrangement so that it could negotiate individually with Rieth-Riley and the other employers. But what should have been typical collective-bargaining negotiations turned into several alleged unfair labor practices, a weeks-long employee lockout, and a strike that continues to this day. The National Labor Relations Board issued a decision ordering Rieth-Riley to bargain in good faith with the Union after finding that Rieth-Riley committed various unfair labor practices throughout the dispute. Rieth-Riley now challenges the Board’s decision, and the Board asks us to enforce it. For the reasons below, we deny Rieth-Riley’s petition for review and enforce the Board’s order.

Attachments: