Boott Mills v. Board of Conciliation and Arbitration

• Decision Date: 31 March 1942
• Citation: 311 Mass. 223,40 N.E.2d 870
• Parties: BOOTT MILLS v. BOARD OF CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

311 Mass. 223

40 N.E.2d 870

BOOTT MILLS v. BOARD OF CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Middlesex.

March 31, 1942

May 12, 1941.

Present: FIELD, C.

J., DONAHUE, QUA DOLAN, COX, & RONAN, JJ.

Labor and Labor Union. Arbitrament and Award.

An award by the board of conciliation and arbitration which fails to decide all the material questions submitted to it for arbitration under G. L.

(Ter. Ed.) c. 150 is invalid.

An award by the board of conciliation and arbitration, to whom were submitted for arbitration under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 150 the two questions, what should be a fair rate of wages for loom fixers, and what should be a fair work load for them, was invalid in that it determined the first question only.

The board of conciliation and arbitration in the performance of its duties and the exercise of its powers in arbitration proceedings under G. L.

(Ter. Ed.) c. 150 acts as a quasi judicial tribunal.

Each of the parties to arbitration proceedings before the board of conciliation and arbitration under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 150 is entitled to a full hearing, to present all the evidence in his possession that is pertinent to the questions submitted, to learn and meet the claims of the opposing party, and to be heard upon the evidence adduced. Per

DOLAN, J.

The board of conciliation and arbitration, in receiving and considering the report of an adjuster in its department whom, after the conclusion of hearings in arbitration proceedings pending before it under G. L. (Ter.

Ed.) c. 150, it had directed to make an investigation of problems involved therein, and in not making the report available to one of the parties to the arbitration nor giving him an opportunity to meet the evidence contained therein committed error rendering its award invalid.

PETITION, filed in the Superior Court on October 18, 1940, for a writ of certiorari.

The case was heard by Hurley, J. In this court, it was argued at the sitting in May, 1941, before Field, C.J., Donahue, Dolan, & Ronan JJ., and afterwards was submitted on briefs to all the Justices except Lummus, J.

W. D. Regan, (W.

S. Kenney with him,) for the petitioner.

R. T. Bushnell, Attorney General, & R.

Clapp, Assistant Attorney General, for the respondents, submitted a brief.

DOLAN, J. This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash arbitration proceedings had between the petitioner and the Loomfixers' Club Association before the respondent board which made an award that the wages then being paid to loom fixers employed by the petitioner be increased by seven per cent. The judge of the Superior Court entered an order on January 15, 1941, that the petition be dismissed "as a matter of law" and reported the case to this court upon the petition, the answer, the return and amendment thereto, and upon the order for judgment. The case was argued before this court on May 12, 1941, which date was more than six months after the award as amended was made by the board.

The petitioner is a Massachusetts corporation engaged in the manufacture of cotton textiles in Lowell, and has in its employ a class of workers known as loom fixers, whose function is to repair and keep the looms in good working order.

In the fall of 1939 the loom fixers employed by the petitioner sought an increase of wages. After several attempts to reach a settlement of their demands, in which the respondent board took part as a board of conciliation, a strike was called by the loom fixers on June 18, 1940. The loom fixers were represented by the Loomfixers' Club Association. On that day the respondent, still acting as a board of conciliation, called a conference at which representatives of the petitioner and of the loom fixers were present. One of the members of the board suggested that the parties submit their differences to arbitration under G.

L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 150, as amended. This suggestion was accepted by the parties and a document entitled "Recommendations of the State Board of Conciliation and Arbitration" was drafted by one of its members and signed by the petitioner and the Loomfixers' Club Association. The document provided as follows: "1. Loomfixers to return to work in the Boott Mills on the first possible shift on Wednesday, June 19, 1940, without discrimination. 2. The Board of Conciliation and Arbitration to arbitrate the following questions on Thursday, June 27, 1940: A. What should be a fair rate of wages for the loomfixers? B. What should be a fair work load for the loomfixers? 3. The above question (#2) to be submitted to the Loomfixers' Association at a meeting to be held at 9:30 A.

M. Wednesday, June 19.

4. If the Association approves, then this recommendation shall go into effect according to its terms." The so called recommendation did not contain a promise by the employees concerned not to strike until after the decision of the board if made within three weeks of the filing of the application as required by G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 150, Section 6. Pursuant to the "agreement" before referred to, a hearing was held by the board on June 27, 1940. All of the evidence presented at the hearing is set forth in the respondent's return. Toward the conclusion of the hearing the board indicated that it would appoint one of its employees to investigate the question of work load, and over the objection of the petitioner decided so to do. Shortly after the conclusion of the hearing the board directed one Tully "Industrial...