Cleveland Electric’s reasoning, it also has standing to arbitrate the claims of the Survivors. D. Consent of the Retirees and Survivors to Union Representation As a final matter, Cooper argues that even if the dispute over the FASB Letter is subject to arbitration and the Union has standing, the district court erred by not requiring consent of the class members to Union representation. rsue their claims directly with the employer if the union obtains an unfavorable arbitration decision. See id. (citing Ros-setto v. Pabst Brewing Co., 128 F.3d 538, 540 (7th Cir.1997) (stating that if the union “loses in arbitration, the retirees lose, period”)); see also Int’l Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers v. Acme Precision Prods., Inc., 515 F.Supp. 537, 540 (E.D.Mich.1981) (<HOLDING>). our holding furthers the policy “recognizing
holding individual defendants subject to suit holding that the plaintiffs acted on behalf of all union members and reimbursing the attorneys fees from the union treasury such that all union members in effect equally contributed to the costs of litigation holding that in statute authorizing suits against united states limits time period in which such suits may be brought united states retains its sovereign immunity as to any suits brought outside of that time period therefore court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over suit against united states that is barred by statute of limitations holding that former employees lawsuit was not barred by res judicata by unions prior suit where employee was not a party to the prior suit as a former union member was not in privity with the union and never authorized the union to represent his interest in prior suit holding that where a union sues on behalf of retirees the judgment in that suit acts as a bar to suits by individual retirees brought at a later time