386 U.S. 171 (1967) Cited 4,196 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that, under the LMRA, an "individual employee has absolute right to have his grievance taken to arbitration regardless of the provisions of the applicable collective bargaining agreement"
363 U.S. 574 (1960) Cited 5,585 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that grievance machinery “is at the very heart of the system of industrial self-government” and the courts should not deny an order to arbitrate “unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute”
363 U.S. 593 (1960) Cited 3,875 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a reviewing court should not refuse to enforce an arbitral award merely because it would read the collective bargaining agreement differently than the arbitrator
363 U.S. 564 (1960) Cited 2,225 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that because the parties bargained for the “arbitrator's judgment,” the underlying “question of contract interpretation” is for the arbitrator, and the courts have “no business weighing the merits of the grievance”
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 708 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Holding that 45 U.S.C. § 153 vests in each individual rail employee the right to share in negotiations over his grievance; to have notice of his NRAB hearing; to be heard before the NRAB; and to bring an enforcement suit
Holding that Section 301 gives a federal court jurisdiction over a suit to enforce an arbitration clause in a collective bargaining agreement even if the case is "truly a representation case" that could also be heard by the NLRB under Section 9 of the NLRA