April 23, 2026
Reyes v. Bulwark Construction, Inc.
Workers covered by a union contract should know that some wage claims may be handled differently — and in a different court — than claims brought by non-union employees.
A construction worker filed employment-related wage claims in state court after working as a nonexempt hourly plasterer for Bulwark Construction. The employer removed the case to federal court and moved to dismiss. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California agreed with the employer, finding that the worker's claims were preempted by federal labor law. The core legal issue was preemption: when a worker's wage or employment claims can only be resolved by interpreting what a collective bargaining agreement says, federal labor law (specifically the Labor Management Relations Act) takes over and the claims must proceed in federal court under federal standards — not California's more protective state law framework.
Why this matters
If you work under a union contract, your wage rights may depend on what that specific contract says, and your legal options may be more limited than those of non-union workers. This doesn’t mean you have no recourse — it means the path may look different. Union members who believe their employer has violated their wage rights should seek advice promptly, because the applicable procedures and deadlines can differ from standard California wage claims.