SW Legal Educational Publishing

Statutory Claim for Damages Subject to Arbitration
Description Appeals court held that employer's possible claim for damages for illegal secondary boycott is subject to arbitration. The employer's bargaining agreement calls for arbitration of all disputes. That will be upheld unless there is a clear waiver of arbitration in certain instances.
Topic Labor Law
Key Words Arbitration; Judicial Forum; Secondary Boycott
C A S E   S U M M A R Y
Facts IBC acquired CBC, whose workers were represented by a union. The union claimed that certain practices of IBC violated the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with CBC. IBC rejected that claim; the union struck IBC. IBC claimed the strike was an illegal secondary boycott under the NLRA. The union agreed with the NLRB to end the strike, but started a new strike against other parts of IBC's operations. IBC sued the union; the district court held the matter was subject to arbitration under the CBA. IBC appealed.
Decision Affirmed. Under the Supreme Court's 1998 decision in Wright v. Universal Maritime Svc. Corp., arbitration clauses, as existed in the CBA, may not be avoided unless there is a "clear and unmistakable" waiver, which was not the case here. Hence, the employer's forum for its statutory rights to claim damages for secondary boycott remain arbitration.
Citation Interstate Brands Corp v. Bakery Drivers, - F.3d - (1999 WL 35222, 2nd Cir.)

Back to Labor Law Listings

©1997-2000  South-Western, a division of Cengage Learning, Inc. Cengage Learning is a trademark used herein under license.