Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Bd. of Indiana Employment Sec. Division, 567

Docket NºNo. 567
Citation143 Ind.App. 17, 14 Ind.Dec. 469, 237 N.E.2d 597
Case DateJune 12, 1968
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

Page 597

237 N.E.2d 597
143 Ind.App. 17
BOOTZ MANUFACTURING CO., Inc., Appellant,
v.
REVIEW BOARD OF the INDIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION,
William H. Skinnerand Richard D. Cobb, as Members of and as
constituting the Review Board of theIndiana Employment
Security Division; and Edward B. Antey, et al., Appellee.
No. 567 A 1.
Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 1.
June 12, 1968.

[143 Ind.App. 18]

Page 598

Arthur R. Donovan, Harry P. Dees, and Joseph A. Yocum, Evansville, for appellant, Kahn, Dees, Donovan & Kahn, Evansville, of counsel.

William E. Roberts and D. Reed Scism, Indianapolis, amicus curiae for Indiana Manufacturers Assn., Roberts & Ryder, Indianapolis, of counsel.

Wilbur F. Dassel, Winfield K. Denton, Evansville, for appellee, Review Bd. of The Indiana Employment Security Div.

John J. Dillon, Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, William E. Matheny, Deputy Atty. Gen.

Edward J. Fillenwarth, Edward J. Fillenwarth, Jr., Indianapolis, for amicus curiae Indiana Conference of Teamsters, Fillenwarth & Fillenwarth, Indianapolis, of counsel.

Lloyd L. DeWester, Jr., Albert J. Schlitt, Indianapolis, for amicus curiae Indiana State A.F.L.-C.I.O., DeWester, Raftery & Andrews, Indianapolis, of counsel.

PRIME, Judge.

This action is an appeal from a decision of the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division rendered April 10, 1967. The decision held that the appellees

Page 599

were entitled to benefits under the statute.

[143 Ind.App. 19] The motion of the appellees to affirm the judgment, which has previously been held in abeyance, is now overruled.

The decision, omitting formal parts, was as follows:

'The point of dispute before the Review Board is whether or not claimants herein were unemployed through no fault of their own during the period October 18, 1965 until November 1, 1965, within the meaning of Section 1504 of the Indiana Employment Security Act.

STATEMENT OF FACTS: The record indicates that a representation election by production and maintenance employees of Bootz Manufacturing Co., Inc., Evansville, Indiana was held on or about July 6, 1965, and subsequently Local 215, Teamsters Union, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, was certified as the bargaining agent.

On or about July 21, 1965, negotiations were begun between the employer and the bargaining agent for the purpose of establishing a labor-management contract through the process of collective bargaining. The record shows that numerous meetings were held in good faith by all parties concerned prior to October 19, 1965. During a negotiating meeting on October 18, 1965, an employer representative advised those present that the employer was prepared to close the plant at the conclusion of the second workshift on that day and the meeting was adjourned at approximately 2:30 p. m. The evidence indicated that the negotiations had not reached an impasse, but rather that they were considered 'fluid.'

At approximately 3:27 p. m. on October 18, 1965, the employer by public address system notified the first shift employees, whose workshift ended at 3:30 p. m., that the plant would not operate on October 19, 1965, second shift employees were notified of the discontinuance of operations. The employer representative testified that management had determined that a 'labor dispute' existed at its establishment, and this was the reason given to employees for the discontinuance of plant operations beginning October 19, 1965.

At the time management determined to 'close the plant,' there was no work stoppage by employees, no overt actions by employees to curtail production by slow-down tactics, and the attendance of production and maintenance[143 Ind.App. 20] employees had been normal during the weeks prior thereto. The record is conclusive in the facts that work was available and that production and maintenance employees had continued working regularly and were ready and available for work.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Review Board finds that subsequent to July 6, 1965, Local 215, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America was certified as the exclusive bargaining agent for all production and maintenance employees of the employer herein.

It further finds that negotiations to establish a labor-management contract began on or about July 21, 1965.

It further finds that the negotiations, including those on October 18, 1965, were conducted in good faith by all parties concerned.

It further finds that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • Block v. Fruehauf Trailer Division Fruehauf Corp., 269A24
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • December 4, 1969
    ...Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div., 242 Ind. 655, 660, 179 N.E.2d 873 (1962); Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div., Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 597, 601 (1968), (Transfer denied). Thus, we are only here concerned with appellant's definition of We agree with appellant's definition, above, as......
  • Smith v. Michigan Employment Sec. Commission, Docket Nos. 62991
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • February 3, 1981
    ...a disqualifying labor dispute does not exist. Bootz Manufacturing Co. v. Review Board of Employment Security Division,[410 MICH 286] 143 Ind.App. 17, 23, 237 N.E.2d 597 (1968). 17 Good faith negotiations, in and of themselves, do not constitute a labor dispute. Id. See also Salenius v. Empl......
  • Lee-Norse Co. v. Rutledge, LEE-NORSE
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • May 18, 1982
    ...courts have taken an interesting approach to lockouts, labor disputes, and unemployment compensation. In Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Board, 143 Ind.App. 17, 237 N.E.2d 597, reh. denied, 143 Ind.App. 111, 238 N.E.2d 472 (1968), a unilateral employer lockout, while negotiations were fluid and ha......
  • Westinghouse Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Director of Division of Employment Sec.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • May 8, 1979
    ...(1944); Brechu v. Rapid Transit Co., 20 Conn.Supp. 209, 131 A.2d 211 (1957); Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Bd. of Employment Security Div., 143 Ind.App. 17, 237 N.E.2d 597 (1968); National Gypsum Co. v. Administrator, La. Dep't of Employment Security, 313 So.2d 230 (La.1975). However, since ther......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • Block v. Fruehauf Trailer Division Fruehauf Corp., 269A24
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • December 4, 1969
    ...Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div., 242 Ind. 655, 660, 179 N.E.2d 873 (1962); Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div., Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 597, 601 (1968), (Transfer denied). Thus, we are only here concerned with appellant's definition of We agree with appellant's definition, above, as......
  • Smith v. Michigan Employment Sec. Commission, Docket Nos. 62991
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • February 3, 1981
    ...a disqualifying labor dispute does not exist. Bootz Manufacturing Co. v. Review Board of Employment Security Division,[410 MICH 286] 143 Ind.App. 17, 23, 237 N.E.2d 597 (1968). 17 Good faith negotiations, in and of themselves, do not constitute a labor dispute. Id. See also Salenius v. Empl......
  • Lee-Norse Co. v. Rutledge, LEE-NORSE
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • May 18, 1982
    ...courts have taken an interesting approach to lockouts, labor disputes, and unemployment compensation. In Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Board, 143 Ind.App. 17, 237 N.E.2d 597, reh. denied, 143 Ind.App. 111, 238 N.E.2d 472 (1968), a unilateral employer lockout, while negotiations were fluid and ha......
  • Westinghouse Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Director of Division of Employment Sec.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • May 8, 1979
    ...(1944); Brechu v. Rapid Transit Co., 20 Conn.Supp. 209, 131 A.2d 211 (1957); Bootz Mfg. Co. v. Review Bd. of Employment Security Div., 143 Ind.App. 17, 237 N.E.2d 597 (1968); National Gypsum Co. v. Administrator, La. Dep't of Employment Security, 313 So.2d 230 (La.1975). However, since ther......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT