Appellant sued Local 60 1 and a monetary employer (Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc.) under § 301, 29 U.S.C.A. § 185 for conspiracy and a discriminatory refusal to refer him to jobs. Included was also the complaint that Local 60 had failed properly to present and prosecute his grievance as to this treatment. The district court on affidavits and depositions which did not controvert the essential facts on which we act, entered an order which essentially dismissed as on summary judgment.

Local 60 maintained two divisions (i) building trades and (ii) metal trades. The worker qualifications, dues, etc., of each division were quite different. Appellant was a member of the metal trades division. Probably through error of an inexperienced night shift hiring hall employee, the appellant was referred to the utility construction project of the employer whose contract with Local 60 was through an association of building construction contractors. When it was shortly discovered that appellant (and *563 another) were metal trades members, Local 60 recalled him from the job.

On facts which appellant never contradicted, there was no breach of the collective bargaining contract and no basis for a grievance. This disposition as on summary judgment was an ideal instrument for terminating this baseless lawsuit in its tracks.

Affirmed.