Stephen J. Schultz, Attorney

Stephen J. Schultz is a shareholder of Merrill, Schultz & Bennett, Ltd., Of Counsel to Marks, Finch, Thornton & Baird, LLP. Mr. Schultz represents employers in a variety of labor and employment contexts including: union organizing campaigns; unfair labor practice proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board; wage and hour litigation with the United States Department of Labor and the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement; litigation involving collective bargaining agreements under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act; ERISA trust fund litigation; litigation under the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980; minority/women’s business enterprise issues; wrongful termination litigation; employment discrimination litigation; and class actions. Mr. Schultz’s published cases include United States v. Capeletti Bros. 448 F. Supp. 66 (S.D. Fla. 1978); and Malcolm Boring, Inc., 259 N.L.R.B. 597 (1981).

Mr. Schultz is admitted to practice before all California, Colorado, and Florida state courts, all of the United States District Courts of California, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and the District of Colorado, the United States Court of Appeals for the First, Third, Fifth, Ninth, and the District of Columbia Circuits, and the United States Supreme Court. He has been a contributing editor to The Developing Labor Law since 1983, and member of the labor law section of the American Bar Association. Mr. Schultz received his Bachelor of Arts and Juris Doctor degrees from Florida State University. Mr. Schultz received Martindale Hubbell’s highest rating, A.V., in recognition of his high level of skill and integrity.

Bar Admissions

  • California (state courts)
  • Colorado (state courts)
  • Florida (state courts)
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals (First, Third, Fifth, Ninth, and District of Columbia Circuits)
  • U.S. District Courts of California (Central, Eastern, Northern, and Southern)
  • U.S. District Court of Colorado
  • U.S. District Court of Florida (Southern)

Education

  • J.D. – Florida State University
  • B.A – Florida State University

Areas of Practice

Representative Experience

Small v. Operative Plasterers’ and Cement Masons’ International Association, Local 200 Appeal Nos. 08-56668 and 08-56942 (9th Cir. 2009)

2009: At the firm’s request, the NLRB obtained an injunction against Plasterers’ Local 200 under section 10(l) of the National Labor Relations Act. The injunction specifically enjoined Local 200 from prosecuting two state-court lawsuits. The state-court lawsuits sought millions of dollars in damages because the firm’s client assigned plastering work to employees who were represented by the Carpenters’ union. The Ninth Circuit rejected Local 200’s argument that the injunction violated the First Amendment.

Standard Drywall, Inc. v. Operative Plasterers’ and Cement Masons’ International Association, Local 200 Case No. EDCV 09-0115 (C.D. Cal. 2009)

2009: This case involved work under a PLA that the firm’s client performed on a public works project. The AFL-CIO’s Plan for the Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes in the Construction Industry issued an arbitration award against the firm’s client. The Federal Court granted the firm’s motion for summary judgment to vacate the Plan award. The Federal Court agreed with the firm that the Plan award violated public policy.

Plasterers, Local 200 (Standard Drywall, Inc.) National Labor Relations Board Case No. 21-CD-659

2008: Local 200 of the Plasterers’ union filed two state court lawsuits against the firm’s client, which was signed to a collective-bargaining agreement with the Carpenters’ union. Local 200’s lawsuits sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and restitution. Unfair labor practice charges were filed against Local 200 under section 8(b)(4)(D) of the National Labor Relations Act. The charges alleged the real motive behind the lawsuits was to force a reassignment of plastering work to Local 200’s members instead of continuing to assign that work to employees represented by the Carpenters’ union. A National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge agreed. He ordered the lawsuits be dropped and that the firm’s client be reimbursed for its attorneys’ fees.

Rossi Concrete, Inc. 21-RC-20948

2007: The Southern California District Council of Laborers filed an election petition with the National Labor Relations Board. The Union sought to represent a bargaining unit comprised of all the company's field construction employees, including its foremen. The firm successfully argued the foremen were supervisors, must be excluded from the bargaining unit, and could not vote in the election. The union lost the election 49 to 19.