Long-Airdox Co., Div. of Marmon Group, Inc. v. International Union United Auto., Aerospace and Agr. Implement Workers of America (UAW), Local 772

Decision Date05 May 1980
Docket NumberNo. 78-1854,LONG-AIRDOX,78-1854
Citation622 F.2d 70
Parties104 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2256, 88 Lab.Cas. P 12,029 COMPANY, a Division of The Marmon Group, Inc., Appellee, v. INTERNATIONAL UNION UNITED AUTOMOBILE AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW), LOCAL 772; Edward A. Travis, Individually and as President of Local 772; Clayton C. Casto, Individually and as Vice President of Local 772; Arthur Mills, Individually and as Financial Secretary of Local 772; Reginald E. Dodd, Individually and as Recording Secretary of Local 772; Melvin Kessler, Individually and as Committeeman of Local 772; Manuel L. Gill, Individually and as Committeeman of Local 772; Homer Vest, III, Individually and as Committeeman of Local 772; and John Doe and Richard Roe (said names being fictitious, their true names being unknown); and all other employees of the plaintiff acting in concert with the named defendants, Appellants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Ralph O. Jones, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Detroit, Mich. (John A. Fillion, Gen. Counsel, Jordan Rossen, M. Jay Whitman, Leonard R. Page, Associate Gen. Counsel, Detroit, Mich., on brief), for appellants.

Willis J. Goldsmith, Washington, D.C. (Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, Washington, D.C., on brief), for appellee.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, BUTZNER, Circuit Judge, and SHIRLEY B. JONES, United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.

BUTZNER, Circuit Judge:

Local 772, UAW, appeals from an order of the district court compelling it to arbitrate a grievance with Long-Airdox Company. We affirm the order to arbitrate, but we vacate those provisions of the order which (1) held that the employees' refusal to cross a picket line was a sympathy strike and (2) retained jurisdiction to award damages if the arbitrator's ruling was favorable to the company. These issues, we conclude, are subject to arbitration.

I

This dispute arose when the company's employees, who are members of Local 772, at its Oak Hill, West Virginia, plant refused to cross a picket line. The pickets were members of the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union Local 3-888, which was engaged in an economic strike against the company at its Pulaski, Virginia, plant. The company notified Local 772 that it considered the refusal to cross the picket line at Oak Hill to be a violation of the collective bargaining agreement. When the employees persisted, the company requested arbitration. Local 772 declined, and the company brought this action. Meanwhile, the strike at Pulaski was settled, the pickets were withdrawn, and the Oak Hill employees returned to work.

The only relief the company now seeks is arbitration of the dispute and damages. It asserts that the employees breached the no-strike clause of the collective bargaining agreement by engaging in a sympathy strike.

The union contends that the employees refused to cross the picket line because they feared violence from hostile pickets. It characterizes the stoppage as a dispute over the employees' safety that is excluded from arbitration by the bargaining agreement. It also contends that the employees' refusal to work is protected by § 502 of the Labor Management Act, 29 U.S.C. § 143, which provides that "quitting of labor . . . in good faith because of abnormally dangerous conditions" is not a strike.

The district court found that the employees participated in a sympathy strike, and it ordered arbitration to determine whether they had violated the bargaining agreement, but it retained jurisdiction to assess damages.

II

Article XIII of the bargaining agreement provides for the arbitration of grievances which are defined as "any complaint, request, or dispute which involves the meaning, interpretation or application of this agreement." The root of the parties' dispute is the meaning, interpretation, and application of the agreement. Because the claims of both parties are facially governed by the agreement, arbitration is appropriate. Steelworkers...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Mautz & Oren, Inc. v. Teamsters, Chauffeurs, and Helpers Union, Local No. 279
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 11 Agosto 1989
    ... ... 279, ... affiliated with International Brotherhood of ... Teamsters, Chauffeurs, usemen and ... Helpers of America, Defendant-Appellant ... No. 88-2903 ... of Elec. Workers v. NLRB, 181 F.2d 34, 37 (2d Cir.1950) (L. Hand, ... See Jones v. Jones Bros. Construc. Co., 879 F.2d 295 at 297-99, 300 (7th Cir. 1989); ... F.2d 175, 181 (7th Cir.1977); Local 519, United Ass'n of Journeymen Plumbers v. NLRB, 416 F.2d ... , 650 F.2d 155, 159 (8th Cir.1981); Long-Airdox Co. v. United Auto Workers, Local 722, 622 F.2d ... initiate grievance proceedings); Faultless Div. v. Local 2040, Int'l Ass'n of Machinists, 513 ... ...
  • U.S. v. Baynes
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 11 Agosto 1982
    ... Page 659 ... 687 F.2d 659 ... UNITED STATES of America ... Eugene BAYNES, a/k/a Bo, ...        Appellant Trice, along with seven co-defendants, was indicted in 1974 for conspiracy ... ...
  • Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. International Broth. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • 14 Septiembre 1981
    ... ... No. 80-1547 ... United States Court of Appeals, ... Fourth Circuit ... The union then struck. The district court enjoined the ... v. Teamsters Local 391, 83 Lab.Cas. (CCH) P 10,572 at 18,222 ... Atkinson v. Sinclair Refining Co., 370 U.S. 238, 241, 82 S.Ct. 1318, 1320, 8 ... Drake Bakeries v. Bakery Workers, 370 U.S. 254, 82 S.Ct. 1346, 8 L.Ed.2d 474 ...         In Long-Airdox Co. v. UAW, Local 772, 622 F.2d 70, 71 (4th Cir ... Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, 524 F.2d 1324, 1329-32 (3d Cir. 1975); ... ...
  • STATE EX REL. CITY HOLDING CO. v. Kaufman
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 12 Noviembre 2004
    ... ... Pioneer Props., Inc. v. Martin, 557 F.Supp. 1354 (D.Kan.1983), appeal ... Group Health, Inc., 442 F.Supp. 937 (S.D.N.Y.1977); ... Communications Workers of America, 475 U.S. 643, 106 S.Ct. 1415, 89 ... arbitration agreement to be valid); Long-Airdox Co. v. International Union United Auto. Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of America (UAW), Local 772, 622 F.2d 70 ... ...

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