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.

BOEING CO. v. INTERNATIONAL UNION

October 7, 1965

Boeing Company, Petitioner
v.
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW, AFL-CIO), et al., Respondents


Body, D.J.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: BODY

This is an action brought by the Boeing Company against the United Auto Workers International Union and its Local 1069 to recover substantial damages caused by a strike and illegal work stoppage alleged to have been in violation of the collective bargaining agreement between the parties in an industry affecting commerce. The jurisdiction of this Court is based primarily upon the provisions of Section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C., Sections 141, 185, and secondarily upon diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C., Section 1332.

 The Company filed its complaint on August 14, 1964, the day after the ten-day strike began. On September 4, 1964, the Union filed its Answer and a motion to stay proceedings, dismiss the complaint, and/or for summary judgment.

 For the most part, the facts in the case relevant to defendant Union's motions are not in dispute. The plaintiff, The Boeing Company (hereinafter called the "Company"), a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Seattle, Washington, is engaged in the manufacture of aircraft, aerospace vehicles, parts and accessories and does business through its Vertol Division at its plants in Morton, Pennsylvania. The defendants, the International Union and Local 1069 of the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW, AFL-CIO), (hereinafter called the "Union"), are together the collective bargaining agent of the production and maintenance employees under a collective bargaining agreement governing the wages, hours, and working conditions of such employees. This agreement was in effect at all times during the course of the alleged illegal work stoppage at plaintiff's Vertol Division at its plants in and about Morton, Pennsylvania.

 At approximately 11:00 P.M. on August 13, 1964, a strike and work stoppage, accompanied by picketing, occurred at plaintiff's Vertol Division plants at Morton, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff alleged in its complaint that the Union, its representatives and members participated in the above occurrences, in violation of the no-strike clause in Article VII, Section 1 of the agreement which provides:

 
The Union, its officers, and members agree that for the duration of this Agreement there shall be no strikes, sit-downs, slow-downs, stoppages of work, and that there will be no picketing of any kind. (Collective bargaining agreement, page 19; Complaint, Exhibit 1.)

 In its Answer, defendant denied any participation by the Union, its officers or representatives in violation of the above-quoted section of their agreement. Instead, defendant alleges that the strike, work stoppage and attendant picketing were initiated and prolonged solely by certain employees of the Company without any authorization or encouragement by the Union, and further alleges that the Union, its officers and representatives complied at all times with the provisions of Article VII, Section 3 which stipulates:

 
In the event that there is any strike, work stoppage, or other interference with production which is not authorized by the Union, the Company agrees that there shall be no liability on the part of the Union, provided that in the event of each such unauthorized action the following conditions are met:
 
A. Within not more than twenty-four (24) hours after the occurrence of any such unauthorized action, the Union, its officers and representatives shall publicly disavow the same by posting a notice on the bulletin boards throughout the plant;
 
B. The Union, its officers and representatives shall immediately order its members to return to work, notwithstanding the existence of any wild-cat picket line;
 
C. The Union, its officers and representatives shall refuse to aid or assist in any way such unauthorized action; and
 
D. The Union, its officers and representatives will in good faith use every reasonable effort to terminate such unauthorized action.
 
(Collective bargaining agreement, pages 19-20; Complaint, Exhibit 1.)

 The case is now before this Court on the Union's motion to stay, dismissal ...


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.