Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

TRAYLOR ENGG. & MFG. DIV. OF FULLER CO. v. USW

August 27, 1963

TRAYLOR ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING DIVISION OF FULLER COMPANY
v.
UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA and Erwin A. Leppert



The opinion of the court was delivered by: LUONGO

After hearing, upon pleadings, proof and stipulation of the parties, the Court makes the following

 1. Plaintiff, Traylor Engineering & Manufacturing Division of Fuller Company, hereinafter referred to as Company, is a Delaware corporation which has its principal place of business at 124 Bridge Street, Catasauqua, Pennsylvania.

 2. Defendant, United Steelworkers of America, hereinafter referred to as Union, is an unincorporated labor association having an office at 1330 Center Street, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

 3. Defendant Erwin A. Leppert is the staff representative of the defendant Union. He maintains his office as such at 1330 Center Street, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

 4. This action is brought under Section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 185(a), and under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act of 1948, as amended, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq.

 5. Plaintiff Company is an employer within the meaning of the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 185(a) and defendant Union is a labor organization within the meaning of said section.

 6. On or about October 31, 1962, plaintiff Company and defendant Union executed a collective bargaining agreement which is now in effect and was in full force and effect at all times material hereto.

 7. Said agreement provides, inter alia, as follows:

 '5.2 E. Any dispute, claim or grievance arising out of or relative to this Agreement shall be submitted to Arbitration under the Voluntary Labor Arbitration Rules, then obtaining, of the American Arbitration Association. The parties agree to abide by the award, subject to such regulations as, any Federal Agency having jurisdiction may impose. The Parties further agree that there shall be no suspension of work when such dispute arises and while it is in process of adjustment or arbitration.' '7.1 Either party to this Agreement shall have the right to refer to the American Arbitration Association any difference, grievance, or dispute which has not been satisfactorily adjusted by means of the steps established in Article V of this Agreement.'

 8. On or about March 26, 1963, Union filed with the American Arbitration Association a demand for arbitration setting forth six grievances, of which two were related. This arbitration proceeding will be hereinafter referred to, for purposes of identification only, as the 'multiple grievance case'.

 9. Under the rules of the American Arbitration Association the parties then proceeded to the selection of Emanuel Stein to act as the arbitrator in said case, but in so doing the Company at all times contended that said arbitrator had no power to hear more than one of the aforesaid grievances.

 10. On or about June 18, 1963, plaintiff Company submitted to the American Arbitration Association its demand for arbitration of the following dispute:

 'Whether or not an arbitrator has the power under the collective bargaining agreement between the parties to hear multiple grievances at the request of the Union demanding arbitration, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.