Reading Anthracite Co.

10 Cited authorities

Vaca v. Sipes
386 U.S. 171 (1967) Cited 4,209 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"
Air Line Pilots v. O'Neill
499 U.S. 65 (1991) Cited 1,076 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that this rule "applies to all union activity"
Humphrey v. Moore
375 U.S. 335 (1964) Cited 760 times
Holding that the union did not breach its duty of fair representation in negotiating a deal which favored some members of the same bargaining unit over others
Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman
345 U.S. 330 (1953) Cited 881 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union acting in its representative capacity owes a duty of fair representation to those on whose behalf it acts
Coronado Co. v. U.M. Workers
268 U.S. 295 (1925) Cited 124 times
Applying Sherman Act to alleged conspiracy by unions involved in labor dispute to restrain interstate trade in coal
Jones v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
495 F.2d 790 (2d Cir. 1974) Cited 84 times
In Jones v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 495 F.2d 790 (2d Cir. 1974), another case relied on by the engineers, the Second Circuit interpreted Howard as simply precluding a per se rule that a union could never violate its duty to nonmembers of its craft.
Teamsters Local Union No. 42 v. N.L.R.B
825 F.2d 608 (1st Cir. 1987) Cited 31 times
Holding that claim accrued when union announced to the plaintiffs that they had been assigned to less desirable shift, even though negotiations with employer regarding the seniority system that would dictate shift assignments occurred two months later
Barton Brands, Ltd. v. N.L.R.B
529 F.2d 793 (7th Cir. 1976) Cited 44 times
Holding that the union would be "absolved of liability" if it could "show some objective justification for its conduct beyond that of placating the desires of the majority of the unit employees at the expense of the minority"
Schick v. N.L.R.B
409 F.2d 395 (7th Cir. 1969) Cited 14 times
No. 16799. April 3, 1969. James R. Cox, David Shields, Chicago, Ill., for petitioners. Arnold L. Burke, Axelrod, Goodman Steiner, Chicago, Ill., for intervenor, Transport Motor Express, Inc. Sherman Carmell, Sheldon M. Charone, Lawrence J. Weiner, Chicago, Ill., for Intervenor Local 705, Carmell Charone, Chicago, Ill., of counsel. Asher, Greenfield, Gubbins Segall, Chicago, Ill., for Local Union No. 710, Lester Asher, Chicago, Ill., of counsel. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Glen M. Bendixsen
Section 6621 - Determination of rate of interest
26 U.S.C. § 6621 Cited 1,874 times 23 Legal Analyses
Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions

Reading Anthracite Co.

10 Cited authorities

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"

Holding that this rule "applies to all union activity"

Holding that the union did not breach its duty of fair representation in negotiating a deal which favored some members of the same bargaining unit over others

Holding that a union acting in its representative capacity owes a duty of fair representation to those on whose behalf it acts

Applying Sherman Act to alleged conspiracy by unions involved in labor dispute to restrain interstate trade in coal

In Jones v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 495 F.2d 790 (2d Cir. 1974), another case relied on by the engineers, the Second Circuit interpreted Howard as simply precluding a per se rule that a union could never violate its duty to nonmembers of its craft.

Holding that claim accrued when union announced to the plaintiffs that they had been assigned to less desirable shift, even though negotiations with employer regarding the seniority system that would dictate shift assignments occurred two months later

Holding that the union would be "absolved of liability" if it could "show some objective justification for its conduct beyond that of placating the desires of the majority of the unit employees at the expense of the minority"

Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions