Roberts v. Lehigh and New England Railway Company, 14303.

• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
• Citation: 323 F.2d 219
• Docket Number: No. 14303.,14303.
• Parties: William C. ROBERTS and John Strunk, Appellants, v. LEHIGH AND NEW ENGLAND RAILWAY COMPANY and Lodge 713, Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, Lodge 734, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Lodge 619, Order of Railway Conductors and Brakemen.
• Decision Date: 02 October 1963

323 F.2d 219 (1963)

William C. ROBERTS and John Strunk, Appellants,
v.
LEHIGH AND NEW ENGLAND RAILWAY COMPANY and Lodge 713, Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, Lodge 734, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Lodge 619, Order of Railway Conductors and Brakemen.

No. 14303.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued April 23, 1963.

Decided October 2, 1963.

323 F.2d 220

Lawrence J. Richette, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellants.

Miles W. Kirkpatrick, Philadelphia, Pa. (E. Jackson Bonney, Philadelphia, Pa., Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for Lehigh and New England Ry. Co.

Cornelius C. O'Brien, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa., for Lodge 734, Brotherhood of RR Trainmen.

323 F.2d 221

Robert W. Sayre, Philadelphia Pa., for Lodge 713, Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen and Lodge 619, Order of Railway Conductors and Brakemen.

Before BIGGS, Chief Judge, and HASTIE and GANEY, Circuit Judges.

GANEY, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from the allowance of motions to dismiss¹ the complaint in favor of the Lehigh and New England Railway Company ("Railway"), and three local lodges of railroad employee unions. Plaintiffs-appellants are former employees of the Railway and former members of one of the three local lodges.

The two plaintiffs were involuntarily retired on June 30, 1962, pursuant to the terms of three memorandum agreements entered into by the Railway and the three local lodges in January of 1962. They sued on behalf of themselves and others similarly affected by defendants' actions. From the complaint and its supporting papers filed on July 11, 1962, we obtained the following information: In May of 1936, all of the defendants entered into the Washington Job Protection Agreement. A pertinent provision of that agreement called for severance pay based on years of service if an employee of a railroad is deprived of his employment by reason of the abolishment of his position as a result of the "coordination" of railroad facilities. Prior to the filing of the complaint and for many years before, there existed a collective bargaining agreement between the Railway's predecessor and the three defendant local lodges concerning "rates of pay, rules and working conditions".² Grievances or claims by an employee against the Railway were to be processed by the local lodge of which he was a member.

In April of 1960, the Railway acquired a railroad company which operated 179 miles of track in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Railway obtained the approval of the Interstate Commerce Commission to abandon 77% or 138 miles of the trackage. In seeking permission the Railway informed the Commission that such abandonment would entail severing the employment of approximately 110 men. The Railway, in the early spring of 1960, approached the three local lodges with the proposal of revising the collective bargaining agreement so that when an employee reached age 65 he would be required to retire without severance pay. By referendum ballot, a majority of the members of the local lodges rejected the proposal. Thereafter, in November of 1961, the Railway severed the employment relationship of 30 men who were at that time over 66 years of age and paid them severance compensation in accordance with the Washington Job Protection Agreement. Immediately thereafter, the three local lodges once more presented the Railway's proposal of involuntary retirement for all employees upon their reaching 65 years of age. By ballot a majority of the employees signified their approval of the proposal. In January of 1962, each of the three local lodges entered into a memorandum agreement with the Railway. All three of the agreements contained the following provisions: The parties have agreed that all employees coming within the scope of the agreement "who have attained the age of 65, or who shall attain that age before July 1, 1962, shall be retired and their names removed from the seniority roster on June 30, 1962.

"Employees who shall attain the age of sixty-five after June 30, 1962, shall be required to retire, and their names will be removed from the seniority roster.

"Neither this agreement, nor any provision contained herein, shall be used as a basis for time or money claims against the Carrier. Disputes involved in the application of this agreement shall be disposed of by the officer of the Railway designated to handle such disputes and the General Chairman.

323 F.2d 222

"This agreement * * * shall cancel and supersede all previous agreements in conflict therewith * * *."

On June 30, 1962, the plaintiffs and ten other employees of the Railway, who were also members in good standing of one of the three local lodges, were involuntarily retired from their employment, without being paid severance compensation, and their names were removed from the seniority rosters of the Railway. Up until the...