Beckley v. Teyssier, 19014.
| Decision Date | 27 May 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 19014.,19014. |
| Parties | Leonard A. BECKLEY and Hugh Parry, Appellants, v. Leonard E. TEYSSIER, Teyssier & Teyssier, Inc., a corporation, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Levy, DeRoy, Geffner, Koszdin & Glow, David L. Rosner, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellants.
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, David A. Maddux, Los Angeles, Cal., Gray, Cary, Ames & Frye, San Diego, Cal., for appellees.
Before JERTBERG, BROWNING and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.
The appellants (plaintiffs in the District Court), appeal from an order entered by the District Court pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 of the United States Arbitration Act 9 U.S.C. § 3,1 staying a civil action instituted by the plaintiffs to collect from the defendants (appellees herein), allegedly unpaid overtime pay, liquidated damages and attorney fees pending the holding of arbitration proceedings under the terms and provisions of a Collective Bargaining Agreement.2
The complaint instituted by the plaintiffs was under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 203 et seq. It is alleged in the complaint that the plaintiffs were employed by the defendants as construction carpenters on a construction project whose situs was on San Clemente Island, off the coast of California; that they were employed on a forty hour weekly basis at the rate of $4.10 per hour plus certain subsistence payments, which was the established rate pursuant to a Collective Bargaining Agreement between the defendants and the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, A.F. of L.-C.I.O.; and that they "performed certain overtime work for which no additional overtime compensation was paid" in violation of the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The stay of the civil action was granted by the District Court on motion of the defendants, supported by affidavits and documents attached thereto.
It appears from the record that the basis of plaintiffs' claim for additional overtime compensation covers time spent by the plaintiffs in travelling to and from the barracks on San Clemente Island, where they were housed and fed, to the job site.
There is no dispute that at all pertinent times the plaintiffs were members of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, and that the defendants were members of the Southern California Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America, and that both parties were bound by the terms and provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement made and entered into between the Southern California Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America and the Union.
Article V of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, entitled "Procedure for Settlement of Grievances and Disputes" provides, in part:
"All grievances or disputes, other than jurisdictional disputes, arising out of the interpretation or application of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement shall be submitted for determination and shall be determined by the procedure set forth in Article V, * * *."
This article further provides for the manner in which individual employees may submit grievances and the procedures for the resolution of such grievances, including provisions for their submission to an impartial arbitrator for final decision, if not otherwise resolved by the parties.
Article XIV entitled "Working Rules", provides in subsection "G":
"Employees shall travel to and from their work on their own time and by means of their own transportation."
Subsection "H" of Article XIV provides for the payment of subsistence and other working conditions to be provided for jobs on San Clemente Island. Appendix "C", Article XIV, deals more particularly with remote site work of the kind involved on San Clemente Island. Paragraph "F" thereof provides:
"Employees shall travel to and from their work on their own time and by means of their own transportation."
Other provisions of the Collective Bargaining...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bulk Carriers, Inc v. Arguelles
...court. Donahue v. Susquehanna Collieries Co., 138 F.2d 3 (CA3 1943); Evans v. Hudson Coal Co., 165 F.2d 970 (CA3 1948); Beckley v. Teyssier, 332 F.2d 495 (CA9 1964). Cf. Fallick v. Kehr, 369 F.2d 899 (CA2 1966); Old Dutch Farms, Inc. v. Milk Drivers and Dairy Emp. Local Union No. 584, Inter......
-
Wren v. Sletten Const. Co.
...Grocers of California, Ltd., 593 F.2d 857 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 827, 100 S.Ct. 51, 62 L.Ed.2d 34 (1979); Beckley v. Teyssier, 332 F.2d 495 (9th Cir. 1964). Appealability of the stay order under section 1292(a)(1) entered in such an action is sanctioned under what is known as th......
-
Thompson v. Iowa Beef Packers, Inc.
...Co., supra; Watkins v. Hudson Coal Co., 151 F.2d 311 (3rd Cir.); Evans v. Hudson Coal Co., 165 F.2d 970 (3rd Cir.); Beckley v. Teyssier, 332 F.2d 495 (9th Cir.). Some federal and state trial courts had previously held to the contrary. Annot., 24 A.L.R.2d The United States Supreme Court does......
-
Leyva v. Certified Grocers of California, Ltd.
...in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement." We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). See Beckley v. Teyssier, 332 F.2d 495, 495 n. 2 (9th Cir. 1964). The appellants are thirty-five delivery truck drivers employed by Certified Grocers of California Limited (Certified).......