3 In their Motion, Defendants argue that “the Plaintiff must establish that the alleged conduct was wholly irrational and that there was a bad faith reason for acting in such an irrational matter.” (Defs. Mot. 8) (emphasis in original). For this proposition, Defendants cite an unpublished District of New Jersey case, Asala v. United Water Resources, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5 8369, *5 (D.N. J. 2008) which in turn cited to Medlin v. Boeing Vertol Co., 620 F. 2d 957, 961 (3d Cir. 1980). However, Medlin predates the Supreme Court’s O’Neill decision which rejected the notion that a viable duty of fair representation claim based on “arbitrary” conduct also required proof of bad faith on the part of the union. See Ooley v. Schwitzer Div., Household Mfg. Inc., 961 F.2d 1293, 1302 (7th Cir. 1992) (<HOLDING>); Connor v. Crowley American Transport, Inc.,
holding that oneill overruled prior seventh circuit law requiring plaintiffs to establish unions bad faith in order to prevail in duty of fair representation actions holding that the duty of good faith and fair dealing is a contractual duty holding that where employee cannot establish unions breach of duty of fair representation in failing to process grievance he must abide the outcome of the contractual remedies holding that state law fraud claims are preempted by the federal labor law duty of fair representation holding that unions interpretation of a contractual provision necessarily favorfing some workers over others did not violate the duty of fair representation