According to the amended complaint, the workers argued they are excused from contractual duties to pursue internal union procedures because the union has "breached its duty of fair representation."
The workers' "contention that the internal union procedures will not provide the full relief they seek is disingenuous," the order says.
In their second amended complaint, the workers argued that due to the "expansive nature of the collusion" the union is hostile to them.
"Plaintiffs do not explain in their pleading why they cannot receive a fair hearing in 2017 or 2018 when the conspirators are no longer in a position to thwart the internal union procedures," the judge ruled. "Additionally, plaintiffs' assertion that the union would be hostile towards them ignores the fact that the UAW Constitution permits them to seek redress before the Public Review Board…"
Lawyers representing the workers and FCA did not return a request for comment. A spokesman for the UAW referred to past comments made by the union that the contracts were not impacted.
In January, then-UAW President Dennis Williams said in a letter addressed to union members: "There is simply no truth to the claim that this misconduct compromised the negotiation of our collective bargaining agreement or had any impact on union funds."