From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Minute Maid Co. v. Citrus, Cannery, Food Processing & Allied Workers, Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local Union #444

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Apr 28, 1964
331 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1964)

Summary

upholding arbitrator's award of back pay where the underlying collective bargaining agreement neither permitted nor precluded such a remedy

Summary of this case from Gilchrist v. Inpatient Medical Services, Inc.

Opinion

No. 21168.

April 28, 1964.

O.R.T. Bowden, Hamilton Bowden, Jacksonville, Fla., for appellant.

Richard H. Frank, Tampa, Fla., for appellees.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and POPE and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

Of the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.


The Company appeals from a judgment of the District Court enforcing compliance with an arbitration award which determines that an employee was laid off in violation of the collective bargaining agreement between Company and Union, and orders reinstatement with back pay. The Company asserts that the award was beyond the authority of the arbitrator because (1) the grievance did not specify the particular subsection of the agreement relied upon by the arbitrator (although it did specify another closely related section) and (2) the collective bargaining agreement does not expressly provide for a back pay remedy (although it does not expressly preclude such remedy).

In line with the so-called trilogy of Supreme Court decisions and the consequent decisions of this Court including Lodge No. 12, Dist. No. 37, Intern. Ass'n of Machinists v. Cameron Iron Works, Inc., 5 Cir., 1961, 292 F.2d 112, the merits of the award are not open to court review. The arbitrator interpreted and applied the collective bargaining agreement to this layoff situation, found that the lay-off violated the agreement, and that reinstatement with back pay was an appropriate remedy. The essence of the award was drawn from the collective bargaining agreement, United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel Car Corp., 1960, 363 U.S. 593, 597, 80 S.Ct. 1358, 4 L.Ed.2d 1424. The contract did not exclude from arbitration either the subject matter or the remedy adopted by the arbiter. Nor on this record do any asserted procedural irregularities vitiate the award. International Ass'n Machinists A.F.L.-C.I.O. v. Hayes Corp., 5 Cir., 1961, 296 F.2d 238, 5 Cir., 1963, 316 F.2d 90; Southwestern Elec. Power Co. v. Local Union No. 738, 5 Cir., 1961, 293 F.2d 929.

United Steelworkers v. American Mfg. Co., 1960, 363 U.S. 564, 80 S.Ct. 1343, 4 L.Ed.2d 1403; United Steelworkers of America v. Warrior Gulf Navigation Co., 1960, 363 U.S. 574, 80 S.Ct. 1347, 4 L.Ed.2d 1409; United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel Car Corp., 1960, 363 U.S. 593, 80 S.Ct. 1358, 4 L. Ed.2d 1424.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Minute Maid Co. v. Citrus, Cannery, Food Processing & Allied Workers, Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local Union #444

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Apr 28, 1964
331 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1964)

upholding arbitrator's award of back pay where the underlying collective bargaining agreement neither permitted nor precluded such a remedy

Summary of this case from Gilchrist v. Inpatient Medical Services, Inc.

In Minute Maid Co. v. Citrus Workers, Local 444, 331 F.2d 280, 281 (5th Cir., 1964), an arbitrator, finding that an employee had been wrongfully discharged, ordered that he be reinstated with back pay.

Summary of this case from United Steelworkers of Amer. v. U.S. Gypsum Co

In Minute Maid Co. v. Citrus Workers, Local 444, 331 F.2d 280, 281 (5th Cir. 1964), an arbitrator, finding that an employee had been wrongfully discharged, ordered that he be reinstated with back pay.

Summary of this case from City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee Police Ass'n
Case details for

Minute Maid Co. v. Citrus, Cannery, Food Processing & Allied Workers, Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local Union #444

Case Details

Full title:MINUTE MAID COMPANY, Appellant, v. CITRUS, CANNERY, FOOD PROCESSING AND…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Apr 28, 1964

Citations

331 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1964)

Citing Cases

Willoughby Roofing Supply v. Kajima Intern.

General Telephone Co. of Ohio v. Communications Workers of America, 648 F.2d 452, 457 (6th Cir. 1981)…

Wing v. J.C. Bradford Co.

The merits of the arbitrators' decision are not open to de novo review by this court. Minute Maid Company v.…