Burke v. French Equipment Rental, Inc., above, 687 F.2d 307 and Waggoner v. Northwest Excavating, Inc., above, 642 F.2d 333, are available for the topic. As the Waggoner court stated: “We read Alyeska [Alyeska Pipeline Co. v. Wilderness Society (1975) 421 U.P. 240 (44 L. Ed. 2d 141, 95 p.Ct. 1612)]. as strict restrictions on the application of state law to support attorneys` fees. These limits have not been crossed by the federal environmental policy alleged by the Wilderness Society of Alyeska.
Nor are these boundaries crossed by the policy invoked by Northwest in this case. Indeed, federal labour policy supports the District Court`s decision to reject the section 1717 allocation fees. `The courts must always assess the disputes referred to in Article 301(a) in the light of the policy of uniformity embodied in that law.` Seymour v. Hull & Moreland Engineering, 605 F.2d 1105, 1111 (9th cir. 1979). Uniformity would be defeated, with few, if any, compensatory benefits by applying fifty different state laws on the issue of attorneys` fees. Of course, this example differs from the situation in which the parties provide for lawyers` fees in their collective agreement. (Waggoner v. Northwest Excavating, Inc., above, pp. 338-339.) In this regard, carpenter`s contract attorneys` fee regime as a party seeking to enforce the arbitrator`s arbitral award cannot be opposed. [5b] The employer`s conduct after the termination of an agreement may require the resolution of disputes arising from the agreement if such conduct demonstrates the intention to settle the claim.
(George Day Const. v. United Broth. of Carpenters, above, 722 F.2d at pp. 1474, 1479.) Nolde Bros Inc., a.a.O., 430 U.S. 243, the pioneering case in this field, involved an employer`s refusal to pay severance pay under a contract terminated upon termination of the contract and closure of the plant. The court placed the dispute under arbitration because “the dispute, although it therefore arises after the expiry of the collective agreement, clearly follows from this contract.” (Id., on p. 249 [51 L.Ed.2d on p.
307], in italics in the original.) Cea negotiates collective agreements regarding the contractor performing work in Northern California, including the Carpenters Master Agreement and the Laborers Master Builders Agreement. In addition, the CEA negotiates contracts for cement masons and operating engineers on behalf of its members who have signed such agreements. The success of the CEA in collective bargaining is based on the active participation of the contracting entities of their member companies, led by experienced employees. Jones & Anderson is a contractor involved in construction activities in Sonoma County, California….