Machine Printers Beneficial Ass'n of U.S. v. Merrill Textile Print Works, No. A--820

• Court: New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
• Citation: 78 A.2d 834,12 N.J.Super. 26
• Docket Number: No. A--820
• Parties: MACHINE PRINTERS BENEFICIAL ASS'N OF UNITED STATES v. MERRILL TEXTILE PRINT WORKS, Inc.
• Decision Date: 15 February 1951

Page 26

12 N.J.Super. 26 78 A.2d 834 MACHINE PRINTERS BENEFICIAL ASS'N OF UNITED STATES
v.
MERRILL TEXTILE PRINT WORKS, Inc. No. A--820. Superior Court of New Jersey
Appellate Division. Argued Jan. 8, 1951.
Decided Feb. 15, 1951.

Page 28

[78 A.2d 835] Archibald Kreiger, Paterson, argued the cause for the plaintiff-appellant (Isadore B. Miller, Paterson, attorney).

Oscar Berman, Paterson, argued the cause for the defendant-respondent (Cole, Morrill & Nadell, Paterson, attorneys).

Before Judges FREUND, PROCTOR and ROGERS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

FREUND, S.J.A.D.

The plaintiff appeals from an order staying further proceedings until an arbitration is held under the provisions of an employment contract between the parties. The question is whether the controversy which has arisen is, under the agreement, arbitrable. The facts and the pertinent principles of law are not in dispute. Our concern is the application of the legal principles to the facts.

The defendant operated a textile printing plant in Paterson, New Jersey, until April 28, 1950, when it discontinued its business, terminated the employment of its employees and commenced the liquidation of its plant and other assets. On the premise that the collective bargaining agreement between the plaintiff union and the defendant employer constituted a contract of employment from January 3, 1949 to December 31, 1949, and thereafter for another year, at a stipulated annual salary, this suit was brought on June 22, 1950, on behalf of one of the employees, a journeyman printer, to recover unpaid wages from the time of cessation of employment, and for damages for breach and repudiation of the contract of employment for the balance of the year. The defendant moved for arbitration contending that the termination of employment was a 'discharge' and that the contract provided for arbitration in the event of disagreement between

Page 29

the parties relating to discharge or wages not specifically covered by the agreement.

The relevant portions of the contract dated January 11, 1949, are as follows: As to Employment:

'Section III. Salary Guaranty. All members of the Association employed at the beginning of this period are hired on an annual basis and shall receive an annual salary payable in equal weekly installments as set forth in Section I of this agreement and any member employed after January 1 shall be hired on a pro rata basis for the balance of the contract year. * * *

'Section XV. In extension of the understanding * * * there shall be no strike, work stoppage, slowdown, interruption or impeding of work for the duration of this agreement. * * *

'Section XVIII. This agreement * * * shall be in full force and effect from and after the 3rd day of January, 1949, up to and including the 31st day of December, 1949; and it is further agreed by and between the parties hereto, that unless either of them shall give to the other sixty (60) days' notice in writing of an intention to terminate this agreement at the end of the term hereof, this agreement shall continue for a further period of one year, and thereafter from year to year unless either of the parties shall give to the other sixty (60) days' notice in writing of an intention to terminate this agreement at the end of any given year.'

[78 A.2d 836] As to Arbitration:

'Section IX. Whenever, during the life of this agreement, any question relating to the discharge of a journeyman printer, or to wages and working conditions which are not specifically covered by this agreement, cannot be agreed upon between representatives of the Company and the Association, it is to be submitted for decision to a Board of Arbitration. * * *'

As to Discharge:

'Section X. A journeyman printer may be discharged only for just cause; * * * If * * * the Association questions the sufficiency or fairness of the alleged cause of the discharge, the sufficiency or fairness of the cause of the discharge shall be determined in accordance with the procedure specified in Section IX hereof. If it be decided that the alleged cause of discharge is insufficient or unfair said journeyman printer shall be reinstated in his employment, and shall be paid forthwith his wages in full for the time lost by him from his employment. If the alleged cause of the discharge

Page 30

be found sufficient and fair, said journeyman printer shall be paid two full weeks' pay. Any journeyman printer discharged under the provisions of this Section must immediately be replaced by another journeyman printer for the remaining period of this contract. * * *'

In an affidavit filed in support of the motion for arbitration, Nathan Perles, secretary of the defendant employer, deposes that 'At about the end of April, 1950, the operations of the firm were discontinued and the plant and equipment were put up for sale. * * * Gaetano Guidice was discharged, as stated in paragraph 5 of the first count of the complaint, on April 28, 1950, because the defendant corporation was discontinuing its active business. Offers were made on behalf of the corporation to pay those amounts which I and the other officers of the corporation thought properly due but...