American Lava Corp. v. LOCAL UNION NO. 222, ETC., 13206.
| Decision Date | 02 January 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 13206.,13206. |
| Citation | 250 F.2d 137 |
| Parties | AMERICAN LAVA CORPORATION, Appellant, v. LOCAL UNION NO. 222, INTERNATIONAL UNION UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, A. F. of L., Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
John S. Fletcher, Jr., Chattanooga, Tenn. (John S. Carriger, of Strang, Fletcher & Carriger, Chattanooga, Tenn., on the brief), for appellant.
H. G. B. King, S. Del Fuston, of King & Fuston, Chattanooga, Tenn., for appellee.
Before SIMONS, Chief Judge, McALLISTER, Circuit Judge, and BOYD, District Judge.
This is a suit for specific performance of the arbitration provisions of a collective bargaining agreement between appellee union and appellant corporation. Appellant denied that the district court had jurisdiction of the action and contended that the dispute in question was not subject to arbitration. The district court denied appellant's motion to dismiss, and granted appellee's motion for summary judgment requiring appellant to proceed with submission to arbitration of the dispute involved in the suit.
The dispute relates to the payment of a Christmas bonus, which had previously been paid by appellant to its employees for a number of years. The evidence disclosed that at the time the bargaining contract was executed the company, in answer to inquiries from employees, stated that it had no intention of doing away with the Christmas bonus. Appellant contends that the matter of the bonus was not subject to the arbitration provisions of the bargaining contract because of the provision therein that "Wages and rates of pay shall not be subject to the arbitration provisions of the contract". In the contract the company bargained with the union to do away with the previously existing benefits to the employees resulting from the free service of coffee by the company and "eating and drinking of soft drinks on the job." The bargaining contract also provided that "Any employee benefits existing prior to the effective date of this Agreement shall continue without change unless such benefits are covered by this Agreement." A further provision of the contract stipulated that "Any employee or group of employees having a grievance arising under the terms of this contract shall first take the matter up with the Steward assigned to the department * * *;" and that if any complaint was taken up as a grievance but not satisfactorily settled, the matter could then be submitted to arbitration by either party.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
LODGE NO. 12, ETC. v. Cameron Iron Works, 17025.
...arbitrability was for the arbitrators in view of the language of the collective bargaining contract. 8 American Lava Corp. v. Local Union No. 222, etc., 6 Cir., 1958, 250 F.2d 137; Goodall-Sanford, Inc., v. United Textile Workers, 1 Cir., 1956, 233 F.2d 104; Wilson Bros. v. Textile Workers ......
-
BRASS & COPPER WKRS. FED. LAB. UN. v. American Brass Co.
...Union United Auto Aircraft v. Benton Harbor Mal. Ind., 6 Cir., 1957, 242 F.2d 536 (pre-Lincoln Mills); American Lava Corp. v. Local Union No. 222, Etc., 6 Cir., 1958, 250 F.2d 137; United Steelworkers of America v. American Mfg. Co., 6 Cir., 1959, 264 F.2d 624, 628 (holding that a "frivolou......
-
United Steelworkers of America v. American Mfg. Co., 13666.
...Electric Co., 1 Cir., 250 F.2d 922, certiorari denied, 356 U.S. 938, 78 S.Ct. 780, 2 L.Ed.2d 813. In American Lava Corporation v. Local Union No. 222, etc., 6 Cir., 250 F.2d 137, we held the grievance there involved to be arbitrable and required the employer to arbitrate. We did not, howeve......
-
Communications Workers v. Ohio Bell Telephone Co.
...Cotton Oil Co., 6 Cir., 1956, 236 F.2d 776, certiorari denied 354 U.S. 910, 77 S.Ct. 1293, 1 L.Ed.2d 1428; American Lava Corp. v. Local Union No. 222 etc., 6 Cir., 1958, 250 F.2d 137. In United Steelworkers of America v. Pullman-Standard Car Mfg. Co., 3 Cir., 1957, 241 F.2d 547, 552, the co......