868 F.2d 573 (3rd Cir. 1989), 88-5554, Laborers' Intern. Union of North America, AFL-CIO v. Foster Wheeler Corp.
|Docket Nº:||88-5554, 88-5570 and 88-5571.|
|Citation:||868 F.2d 573|
|Party Name:||LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL-CIO Appellant/Cross Appellee, v. FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION, and Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Appellees/Cross Appellants.|
|Case Date:||February 22, 1989|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit|
Dec. 16, 1988.
Rehearing Denied March 21, 1989.
Orrin Baird, David Elbaor, Connerton, Ray & Simon, Washington, D.C., for Laborers' Intern. Union of North America, AFL-CIO.
Albert B. Jeffers, Morristown, N.J., and Perry M. Rosen, Stuart Rothman, Rogers & Wells, Washington, D.C., for Foster Wheeler Energy Corp.
Vincent J. Apruzzese, Francis A. Mastro, Apruzzese, McDermott, Mastro & Murphy, Springfield, N.J., for Foster Wheeler Corp.
Before GIBBONS, Chief Judge, and HUTCHINSON and HUNTER [*], Circuit Judges.
OPINION OF THE COURT
1. This case addresses the propriety of a district court's delegation to an arbitrator of the decision whether a nonsignatory corporation was bound by its subsidiary's national labor agreement. Plaintiff-appellant, cross-appellee Laborers' International Union of North America (the "Union") appeals from a judgment entered in the district of New Jersey holding that on June 6, 1985, defendant-appellee, cross-appellants Foster Wheeler Corp. ("FWC") and Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. ("FWEC") unilaterally repudiated a collective bargaining agreement with the Union (the "National Agreement"). The Union contends that the district court erred because FWC and FWEC could not repudiate a collective bargaining agreement unilaterally, and even if they could, did not do so until August 9, 1985.
2. FWC and FWEC, the defendants in the district court, cross-appeal. FWC contends that the district court erred in compelling arbitration because FWC was not a party to the contract at issue. FWEC contends that the district court erred because unilateral repudiation occurred considerably before June 6, 1985.
3. FWC is an international holding company consisting of various subsidiaries involved in construction. The Union is the bargaining agent for laborers employed by one of FWC's subsidiaries, FWEC. The Union and FWEC are parties to the National Agreement whereby FWEC agreed that most of its work, and the work of FWEC's subsidiaries, would be performed pursuant to the National Agreement. The Union, in return, guaranteed that the work would be performed pursuant to the National Agreement regardless of locale. The National Agreement included a grievance procedure covering "any dispute over the application or interpretation of this Agreement." The National Agreement expires annually on July 15 of each year and is automatically renewed unless specifically terminated or amended by the parties. FWC was not a signatory to the National Agreement.
4. In 1979, FWC formed another wholly-owned subsidiary, Energy Plant Constructors, Inc. ("EPC"), to operate as a construction contractor on a nonunion basis. FWC is thus a "double-breasted" contractor--FWEC is its unionized subsidiary and EPC is its nonunionized subsidiary. EPC is not a party to this case.
5. In the fall 1984, EPC won a contract from the Mobil Oil Exploration and Production Southeast, Inc. ("MOEPSI"), to construct a natural gas processing plant near Mobile, Alabama. EPC hired its first field construction employee at the MOEPSI site on April 2, 1985, but did not apply FWEC's National Agreement with the Union at the MOEPSI site. The Union, FWC, and FWEC corresponded back and forth about this situation in the spring of 1985. On June 3, 1985, the president of EPC wrote to the Union and said that EPC "is not and never has been party to any collective bargaining agreement" with the Union. The Union received the letter on June 6, 1985. The Union...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP