PILOT FREIGHT CAR., INC. v. INTERNATIONAL BRO. OF TEAM., ETC., C-219-WS-72.
Decision Date | 08 September 1972 |
Docket Number | No. C-219-WS-72.,C-219-WS-72. |
Parties | PILOT FREIGHT CARRIERS, INC., Plaintiff, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of North Carolina |
J. W. Alexander, Jr., Charlotte, N. C., John M. Minor, William K. Davis, Winston-Salem, N. C., for plaintiff.
Renn Drum, Winston-Salem, N. C., L. N. D. Wells, Jr., Dallas, Tex., Hugh J. Beins, Ian D. Lanoff, Washington, D. C., for defendant.
This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion to dissolve or suspend the preliminary injunction heretofore entered by this Court on July 28, 1972. The defendant appealed and thereafter, pending such an appeal, sought and obtained from the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit an order suspending proceedings in the Appellate Court with leave to proceed here seeking to dissolve or suspend such preliminary injunction on the grounds that in the interim the mandatory grievance procedures contained in the collective bargaining agreement had been complied with by the parties.
The particularly relevant portions of the preliminary injunction issued by this Court on July 28, 1972, include the following:
In its Memorandum Opinion dictated on July 28, 1972, the Court held as follows:
The National Grievance Committee (Committee) met on Friday, August 18, 1972. This Court has before it and has considered carefully the transcript compiled at that session of the Committee, the transcript being plaintiff's Exhibit G. The Committee, on August 21, 1972, issued a short decision, in the form of a letter, which reads as follows:
On page 2 of its Memorandum Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Motion, plaintiff complains that, "The `decision' of the Committee is so ambiguous that it leaves the plaintiff at a loss to understand precisely what it means." In support of its position, plaintiff has cited Electrical Contractors Association of Greater Boston, Inc. v. Local Union 103, 327 F.Supp. 1177, at page 1180 (D.Mass. 1971), which holds:
"Under generally accepted principles, certainty is an indispensable element to the enforceability of an award, i. e., an award must be sufficiently definite so that only ministerial acts of the parties are necessary to carry it into effect."
It is not the duty of this Court to interpret the decision of the Committee, nor have the parties to the National Master Freight Agreement (NMFA) bargained for an interpretation by this Court. The parties bargained for submission to the Committee of all factual grievances or questions of interpretation which are submitted to the grievance procedure. This committee is the final arbiter under the grievance machinery. "If the National Grievance Committee resolves the dispute by a majority vote of those present and voting, such decision shall be final and binding on all parties." Article 8, section 2 of NMFA.
In this case, the Committee has spoken, if not with the detail of General Drivers, Warehousemen and Helpers, Local Union No. 89 v. Riss & Co., 372 U.S. 517, 83 S.Ct. 789, 9 L.Ed.2d 918 (1963), at least with...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pilot Freight Carriers v. INTERN. BROTH., ETC.
...that the grievance procedures had been exhausted and that a Boys Markets injunction was no longer justified. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. IBT, 353 F.Supp. 869 (M.D.N.C. 1972).16 On September 15, 1972, IBT notified Pilot it would resume its strike unless Pilot recognized IBT as the Florid......
-
Boire v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, ETC.
...of the mandatory grievance procedures contained in the NMFA." Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, M.D. N.C., 1972, 353 F.Supp. 869, 871. The Court explicitly refused to decide whether the Committee's award wa......
-
Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. LOCAL 391, INTERN. BRO., ETC.
...though the Board might have, and ultimately did take, jurisdiction of the controversy also. See Pilot Freight Car, Inc. v. International Bro. of Team., etc., 353 F.Supp. 869 (M.D.N.C.1972). When the Board began its unit determination hearing (see footnote 2), it sought an injunction pending......
-
Central Motor Exp., Inc. v. GENERAL DRIVERS, ETC.
...Helpers of America, 479 F.2d 778 (5th Cir. 1973) at p. 783, and also Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, 353 F.Supp. 869 (M.D.N.C. 1972). Even if this Court is in error in this finding, it would be a relati......