Textile Workers Union v Lincoln Mills
PROCEDURAL
POSTURE: On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit, petitioner union challenged a judgment holding
that although the district court had jurisdiction to entertain
petitioner's suit to compel arbitration, the district court had no
authority founded either in federal or state law to grant relief.
OVERVIEW:
On review, the court held that the agreement to arbitrate grievance
disputes contained in a collective bargaining agreement entered into
between petitioner union and respondent employer, under the authority of
§ 301, 29 U.S.C.S. § 185, of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947
(Act), should be specifically enforced. The court stated that it would
undercut the Act and defeat its policy if it read § 301 narrowly as only
conferring jurisdiction over labor organizations. A case or controversy
arising under § 301(a) was one within the purview of judicial power as
defined in U.S. Const. art. III. Further, as the policy in favor of the
enforcement of agreements to arbitrate grievance disputes was clear,
there was no reason to submit them to the requirements of § 7, 29
U.S.C.S. § 101, of the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
OUTCOME: The court reversed, holding that the Labor Management Relations Act would be undercut and its policy defeated if the Act was read narrowly as only conferring jurisdiction over labor organizations.
No comments:
Post a Comment