812 F.2d 219 (5th Cir. 1987), 86-1752, International Ass'n of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Lodge No. 2504 v. Intercontinental Mfg. Co., Inc.

Docket Nº:86-1752
Citation:812 F.2d 219
Party Name:INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, AFL-CIO, LODGE NO. 2504, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. INTERCONTINENTAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
Case Date:March 12, 1987
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 219

812 F.2d 219 (5th Cir. 1987)

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE

WORKERS, AFL-CIO, LODGE NO. 2504, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

INTERCONTINENTAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 86-1752

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

March 12, 1987

Page 220

Rod Tanner, James M. Whitton, McGee, Tanner, Coble & Whitton, Ft. Worth, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Thomas A. Graves, Dallas, Tex., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, GARWOOD, and HILL, Circuit Judges.

CLARK, Chief Judge:

The plaintiff in this case, Lodge No. 2504 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO ("Lodge No. 2504"), appeals the district court's grant of the defendant's motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

I. Background

The defendant, Intercontinental Manufacturing, Inc. ("Intercontinental") produces shell casings for explosive devices at its plant in Garland, Texas. Lodge No. 2504 is the certified bargaining representative for some of Intercontinental's employees. On March 14, 1985, Intercontinental discharged four of those employees for violation of a company rule prohibiting "bringing, possessing or using intoxicating liquors ... on company premises." Three of the employees, Owens, Forbis and Foster, admitted they had beer in their possession in the company's parking lot after their shift had ended. The fourth employee, Gandera, admitted having beer in his possession in the parking lot during his lunch hour.

Lodge No. 2504 submitted a written grievance to Intercontinental contesting the discharges on the ground that the "punishment is too severe for [the] alleged offense." Intercontinental denied the union's request for reinstatement of the employees and refused to submit the dispute to arbitration.

Intercontinental asserted the contract did not require arbitration of the dispute. The contract lists the rule on alcohol as a "Group III" rule and provides that an "employee may be discharged for violation of Group III rules." The same article of the contract provides that:

Discipline exercised by the company pursuant to this article will be subject to grievance and arbitration only to the extent of whether or not the act was committed for which the employee was disciplined and not...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP