Question: Darryl Green worked as a utility worker for National Edison, and was a member of Local 222 of the Utility Workers of America Union. The collective agreement between National Edison and the union provided that employees who have been employed for one year or longer can only be discharged for just cause, but employees with less than one year's service are probationary workers and can be discharged at will. On March 12, 2007, while still a probationary employee, Green was disciplined for being away from his work area without permission on two occasions. As penalty for those violations, consistent with the collective agreement, the employer extended Green's probationary period. Several months later, on two consecutive days, Green left work early without permission. The employer terminated Green because he was still a probationary employee, and had violated the employer's work rules.

Green filed a grievance challenging his discharge, and the local union pursued the grievance through the preliminary stages of the grievance procedure under the collective agreement. The employer denied the grievance and refused to reinstate Green. Green then asked the local union to take his grievance to arbitration, the final step of the grievance procedure. At a meeting of the local, Green presented his request for arbitration, but the membership of the local voted not to take his grievance to arbitration. Green appealed that decision to the national union, which upheld the local decision not to arbitrate his grievance. Green then filed suit against both the employer and the local and national unions. He alleged that the employer violated the collective bargaining agreement by terminating his employment without just cause, and that the local and national unions had breached their duties of fair representation by not submitting his grievance to arbitration. How should the court rule on his suit against the employer and the unions? Explain your answer.