General Committee of Adjustment, United Transp. Union E v. Burlington Northern, Inc., No. 79-1458
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before HEANEY and HENLEY, Circuit Judges, and SCHATZ; HEANEY |
| Citation | 620 F.2d 161 |
| Parties | 103 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2990, 88 Lab.Cas. P 11,940 GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT, United Transportation Union E, Burlington Northern, Inc., Great Northern Segment, Appellant, v. BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC., Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, Appellees. |
| Docket Number | No. 79-1458 |
| Decision Date | 19 March 1980 |
Page 161
E, Burlington Northern, Inc., Great Northern
Segment, Appellant,
v.
BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC., Brotherhood of Locomotive
Engineers, Appellees.
Eighth Circuit.
Decided March 19, 1980.
Page 162
Patrick J. Foley, DeParcq, Anderson, Perl, Hunegs & Rudquist, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.
Barry McGrath, St. Paul, Minn., for appellee, Burlington Northern, Inc.
Harold A. Ross, Ross & Kraushaar, Cleveland, Ohio and Robert V. Atmore, Lindquist & Vennum, Minneapolis, Minn., filed brief for appellee Broth. of Locomotive Engineers.
Before HEANEY and HENLEY, Circuit Judges, and SCHATZ, District Judge. *
HEANEY, Circuit Judge.
This matter is before the Court for a second time. When it was first here, 1 we made it clear that employees of Burlington Northern, Inc. (BNI), who are members of the United Transportation Union-E (UTU-E) working as engineers in the United States, have a right to have their merger-related disputes 2 decided by a Public Law Board on which the UTU-E is represented. As we there stated:
The issue is an important one not only to the employees of the BNI who are members of the UTU-E but also to the Union itself. An aggrieved employee cannot help but feel that his interests in an arbitration proceeding will be better served if his union representative sits in on the closed door discussions that follow a presentation than if a representative of a union to which he does not belong or to which he has not entrusted the adjustment of his grievance has this privilege. Yet, the employee's position on the seniority roster may be such that it is important to him to maintain his membership in the UTU-E. Moreover, an employee may have strong personal feelings for wanting to maintain membership in the union of his choice and to have that union process his grievances, including those that may be merger-related.
The UTU-E is certain to be affected if it loses the right to sit as a member of arbitration panels adjusting merger-related grievances. Some firemen, who might otherwise choose the UTU-E, will join the BLE (Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers) simply because they will want the most effective representation possible. The problem is compounded because the line between merger-related grievances and those arising out of collective bargaining agreements is one that cannot always be drawn with certainty.
Gen. Committee of Adjust. v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 563 F.2d 1279, 1284 (8th Cir. 1977).
We noted, however, that there was a conflict in the record as to whether the employees in question worked exclusively in Canada. The BNI asserted that such was the case. The Union took the position that at least one of the employees involved performed some work in Seattle, Washington. Id. at 1285-1286.
Page 163
We also noted that the UTU-E presented evidence that a long-standing custom and practice existed between the UTU-E and the BNI and its predecessors under which the parties agreed that work performed in Canada would be subject to the dispute settlement provisions of the Railway Labor Act. The BNI took a contrary position. Id.
We then disposed of the issue raised with respect to work performed exclusively in Canada by holding that the right to have a Public Law Board created "does not extend to claims submitted by employees who perform the disputed work exclusively outside the territorial limits of the United States." Id. at 1286. We specifically left open the question of whether jurisdiction of a Public Law Board over such disputes can be conferred by custom and practice and whether such a custom and practice exists. Finally, we remanded the matter to the district court to determine the questions left open...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vollmar v. CSX Transp., Inc., Civ. A. No. 88-0938-A.
...v. United States, 102 L.R.R.M. 2869, 2871 (D.Minn.1979), aff'd sub. nom., General Comm. of Adjustment v. Burlington Northern Ry. Co., 620 F.2d 161 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 826, 101 S.Ct. 88, 66 L.Ed.2d 29 (1980) (jurisdiction of arbitral board created under RLA cannot be imposed o......
-
Gallipo v. City of Rutland, No. 91-320
...implied contractual status.' " Id. at 525, 594 A.2d at 426 (Dooley, J., concurring) (quoting General Comm. of Adj. v. Burlington Northern, 620 F.2d 161, 163 (8th Here, plaintiff offers the deposition of former Fire Chief Gerald Moore, who, when asked if officers had been appointed on the ba......
-
Dufrin v. Spreen, No. 82-1002
...has "probable cause to believe that contraband or weapons are being concealed on the person of the traffic violator." Tinetti v. Wittke, 620 F.2d at 161. In affirming the injunction, the Seventh Circuit found that the sheriff's blanket policy of strip searching all detainees violated the Fo......
-
RASTALL v. CSX TRANSP., INC., No. 89-261
...8, 705 F. Supp. at 1164-65; General Comm. on Adjustment v. United States, 102 L.R.R.M. 2869, 2871, 1979 WL 1862 (D.Minn. 1979), aff'd, 620 F.2d 161 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 826, 101 S.Ct. 88, 66 L.Ed.2d 29 (1980); Air Line Stewards & Stewardesses Ass'n v. Transworld Airlines, 173 ......
-
Vollmar v. CSX Transp., Inc., Civ. A. No. 88-0938-A.
...v. United States, 102 L.R.R.M. 2869, 2871 (D.Minn.1979), aff'd sub. nom., General Comm. of Adjustment v. Burlington Northern Ry. Co., 620 F.2d 161 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 826, 101 S.Ct. 88, 66 L.Ed.2d 29 (1980) (jurisdiction of arbitral board created under RLA cannot be imposed o......
-
Gallipo v. City of Rutland, No. 91-320
...implied contractual status.' " Id. at 525, 594 A.2d at 426 (Dooley, J., concurring) (quoting General Comm. of Adj. v. Burlington Northern, 620 F.2d 161, 163 (8th Here, plaintiff offers the deposition of former Fire Chief Gerald Moore, who, when asked if officers had been appointed on the ba......
-
Dufrin v. Spreen, No. 82-1002
...has "probable cause to believe that contraband or weapons are being concealed on the person of the traffic violator." Tinetti v. Wittke, 620 F.2d at 161. In affirming the injunction, the Seventh Circuit found that the sheriff's blanket policy of strip searching all detainees violated the Fo......
-
RASTALL v. CSX TRANSP., INC., No. 89-261
...8, 705 F. Supp. at 1164-65; General Comm. on Adjustment v. United States, 102 L.R.R.M. 2869, 2871, 1979 WL 1862 (D.Minn. 1979), aff'd, 620 F.2d 161 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 826, 101 S.Ct. 88, 66 L.Ed.2d 29 (1980); Air Line Stewards & Stewardesses Ass'n v. Transworld Airlines, 173 ......