Keay v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., No. 71-1021.
| Decision Date | 16 April 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 71-1021. |
| Citation | 440 F.2d 667 |
| Parties | Robert E. KEAY, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. EASTERN AIR LINES, INC., Defendant, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit |
Joel Z. Eigerman, Boston, Mass., with whom Morris M. Goldings, and Mahoney, McGrath, Atwood & Goldings, Boston, Mass., were on brief, for appellant.
James C. Heigham, Boston, Mass., with whom Choate, Hall & Stewart, Boston, Mass., was on brief, for appellee.
Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, McENTEE and COFFIN, Circuit Judges.
This is an action to review an arbitration award as to the size of a pension made by the Pilots' System Board of Adjustment, concededly pursuant to procedure governed by the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 153 and 184. International Ass'n of Machinists v. Central Airlines, Inc., 1963, 372 U.S. 682, 685-686, 690, 83 S.Ct. 956, 10 L.Ed.2d 67. The parties have engaged in considerable sparring regarding the scope of permissible review. Clearly, it is very narrow. Gunther v. San Diego & A. E. Ry., 1965, 382 U.S. 257, 261, 86 S.Ct. 368, 15 L.Ed.2d 308 (); Diamond v. Terminal Ry. Alabama State Docks, 5 Cir., 1970, 421 F.2d 228.
The earlier that plaintiff appellant became permanently disabled, the smaller the size of his pension. Concededly he has been totally disabled from severe headaches since 1962, when he went on sick leave. The single question is whether he can complain because the Board found that his disability became permanent at the date his sick leave expired and he did not return to work, as distinguished from a much later date when he was permanently grounded after a medical determination that the cause of the headaches was irreversible.
Plaintiff attacks the Board's decision on a broad base. His contention that the Board should have made subsidiary findings and, possibly, rulings, in order to permit review, is predicated on the assumption that the award was but a step in a procedure under which he was entitled to a review as of course. Congress did not make the Board an inferior entity subject to the general supervision of the courts. Rather, as the Supreme Court has pointed out in Gunther, supra, 382 U.S. at 263, 86 S.Ct. 368, the Board is in the role of arbitrator, and there is no duty imposed upon arbitrators to make subsidiary findings. Atkinson v. Sinclair Refining Co., 1962, 370 U.S. 238, 244 n. 4, 82 S.Ct. 1318, 8 L.Ed.2d 462. Pl...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
ME. CENT. R. v. BROTH. OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMP., Civ. No. 86-0366 P.
...without reason" standard articulated in Gunther and thus considers the above cases to be binding authority. Cf. Keay v. Eastern Air Lines, 440 F.2d 667 (1st Cir.1971) (affirming section 3 arbitration without discussing general labor law arbitration Turning now to the issues before it, the C......
-
Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int., Civ. A. No. 829-73.
...statute, might set aside an award where the Board's interpretation is wholly baseless and without reason. See Keay v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 440 F.2d 667, 668 (1st Cir. 1971); McDonald v. Penn Central Transportation Co., supra, 337 F.Supp., at 806. It is exactly this action which the plain......
-
Deboles v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
...over the matter. Gunther v. San Diego & A. E. Ry. Co., 382 U.S. 257, 86 S.Ct. 368, 15 L.Ed.2d 308 (1965); Keay v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 440 F.2d 667 (1st Cir. 1971). While the defendants certainly are correct in their statement of the law, they err in characterizing this dispute as one d......
-
Dirring v. Lombard Bros., Inc.
...may not wait to make an objection ... until after an unfavorable award has been made." 648 F.2d at 913. 5 Accord, Keay v. Eastern Airlines, 440 F.2d 667 (1st Cir.1971); Virgin Island Nursing Assoc. Bargaining Unit v. Schneider, 668 F.2d 221 (3rd ...