Marcus model.Labor law. A method for determining whether a union member’s state-law claim against the employer is preempted by federal law, by focusing on whether the state-law claim can be maintained independently of an interpretation of the collective-bargaining agreement. • In Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486 U.S. 399, 108 S.Ct. 1877 (1988), the Supreme

Court held that a union member’s state-law retaliatory-discharge claim was not preempted by the Labor–Management Relations Act because the claim could be resolved without interpreting the collective-bargaining agreement. There are at least two models for applying the Lingle test: the White model, which focuses on whether the claim is negotiable or nonnegotiable (that is, whether state law allows the claim to be waived by a private contract), and the Marcus model, which focuses on the independence of the claim in relation to the collective-bargaining agreement. Under the Marcus model, if the claim can be maintained separately from an interpretation of the

collective-bargaining agreement, it is not preempted regardless of whether the claim is generally waivable in contract. The Marcus model is named for the author of the law-review note in which it was proposed. Stephanie R. Marcus, Note, The Need for a New Approach to Federal Preemption of Union Members’ State Law Claims, 99 Yale L.J. 209 (1989). See LINGLE TEST.Cf. WHITE MODEL.

[Blacks Law 8th]