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.

INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELEC. WORKERS v. WESTINGHOU

August 12, 1978

INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS et al.
v.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP



The opinion of the court was delivered by: KNOX

Plaintiffs being labor organizations representing employees at various Westinghouse Electric Corporation plants have brought this suit on behalf of certain members to enforce certain awards of arbitrators. The awards were made in connection with grievances resulting from terminations for disciplinary reasons. The agreement revolves around the words "without loss of seniority" as contained in the awards. The court makes the following

 FINDINGS OF FACT

 (1) The plaintiffs are labor organizations and represent various employees throughout the United States.

 (2) Westinghouse Electric Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) is an employer and employs numerous individual members of the plaintiff labor organizations.

 (3) At all times pertinent to this suit, the plaintiffs and the defendant were parties to a national collective bargaining agreement dated June 16, 1978.

 (4) The plaintiffs, in order to coordinate and administer their collective bargaining relationship with the defendant, have established the IUE-Westinghouse Conference Board.

 (5) The IUE-Westinghouse Conference Board, through its elected delegates and full time officers, negotiates with the defendant and processes grievances that arise under national collective bargaining agreements.

 (6) The national collective bargaining agreement that was in effect at all times pertinent to this suit and which is dated June 16, 1973, contains, in Section XIV-A, a grievance and arbitration procedure which culminates in final and binding arbitration.

 (7) Prior to the collective bargaining agreement of 1973, as described above and, in fact, prior to 1963, the plaintiffs and defendant did not consistently define or apply seniority or service credits.

 (8) During the course of negotiations for a national collective bargaining agreement in 1963, the defendant proposed that seniority should, for all purposes and at all locations, be uniformly defined and applied.

 (9) In 1963, the plaintiffs and defendant did agree that, for all purposes and at all locations, seniority would be uniformly defined and applied.

 (10) On or about September 20, 1973, an individual member of plaintiff Local 777, Devota Person, was discharged by the defendant.

 (11) On or about September 29, 1972, the plaintiff Local filed a grievance on behalf of Devota Person.

 (12) The Devota Person grievance was submitted to final and binding arbitration and on November 2, 1973, Arbitrator Jerome Klein issued his opinion and award.

 (13) Arbitrator Jerome Klein's award, in pertinent parts provides:

 
I. It is the Award of the Arbitrator that Person's discharge was not for just cause.
 
II. It is the further Award of the Arbitrator that Person was guilty of very serious misconduct on September 20, 1972, justifying a very severe disciplinary penalty.
 
III. It is the further Award of the Arbitrator that Person be restored to his former job without back pay but without loss of seniority or other similar rights.

 (14) On or about November 11, 1973, the defendant reinstated Devota Person to his former position.

 (15) Devota Person, however, from September 20, 1972 to November 11, 1973 that is from the date of discharge to the date of reinstatement was not credited with service or seniority

 (16) In September 1974, an individual member of plaintiff Local 410, Thelma Kane, was discharged by the defendant.

 (17) On or about September 9, 1974, the plaintiff Local filed a grievance on behalf of Thelma Kane.


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.