|
|
Carey v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 375 U.S. 261 (1964)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Carey v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 375 U.S. 261 (1964)
Carey v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. No. 21 Argued December 11-12, 1963 Decided January 6, 1964 375 U.S. 261
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK
Syllabus
Petitioner union (IUE) and respondent employer entered into a collective bargaining agreement covering workers at several plants, including one where the dispute here involved occurred. The agreement states that the employer recognizes IUE and its locals as exclusive bargaining representatives for each of those units for which IUE or its locals have been certified by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive bargaining representative, and the agreement lists among those units for which IUE has been certified a unit of "all production and maintenance employees" at the plant where the controversy arose, "but excluding all salaried technical . . . employees." The agreement also contains a grievance procedure for the use of arbitration in case of unresolved disputes, including those involving the "interpretation, application or claimed violation" of the agreement. IUE filed a grievance asserting that certain employees in the engineering laboratory at the plant in question, represented by another union which had been certified as the exclusive bargaining representative for a unit of "all salaried, technical" employees, excluding "all production and maintenance" employees, were performing production and maintenance work. The employer refused to arbitrate on the ground that the controversy presented a representation matter for the National Labor Relations Board. IUE petitioned a New York state court for an order compelling arbitration.
Held: Whether the dispute be considered one involving work assignment or one concerning representation, it is not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board, and there is no barrier to use of the arbitration procedure. Pp. 263-273.
11 N.Y.2d 452, 184 N.E.2d 298, reversed.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Carey v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 375 U.S. 261 (1964) in 375 U.S. 261 375 U.S. 262. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=D8LZQY25ZQKWFPF.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Carey v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 375 U.S. 261 (1964), in 375 U.S. 261, page 375 U.S. 262. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=D8LZQY25ZQKWFPF.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Carey v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 375 U.S. 261 (1964). cited in 1964, 375 U.S. 261, pp.375 U.S. 262. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=D8LZQY25ZQKWFPF.
|