§
Strick Corp.

15 Cited authorities

  1. Vaca v. Sipes

    386 U.S. 171 (1967)   Cited 4,207 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"

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. Steele v. L. N.R. Co.

    323 U.S. 192 (1944)   Cited 959 times
    Holding that a labor organization must represent all members of a "craft or class of employees . . . regardless of their union affiliations or want of them"

  5. Machinists Local v. Labor Board

    362 U.S. 411 (1960)   Cited 276 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of America

    391 U.S. 418 (1968)   Cited 215 times
    Holding that union could not expel member because he filed unfair labor practice charge against it without first exhausting internal remedies as provided in union constitution

  7. Scofield v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    394 U.S. 423 (1969)   Cited 117 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding union rule, enforceable by fines and expulsion, imposing limitation on immediate pay that members could receive for piecework because Court found no "impairment of statutory labor policy"

  8. Ruzicka v. General Motors Corporation

    523 F.2d 306 (6th Cir. 1975)   Cited 115 times
    Finding inexplicable delay in pursuing grievances to be a breach of the DFR and stating, “The requirement of exhaustion of intra-Union remedies is bottomed on the hope that such procedures will quickly resolve disputes without the delay inherent in the judicial process and with the aid of persons experienced at resolving member-union conflicts short of a full-blown judicial proceeding. When that hope has failed, however, the member is not barred from proceeding to federal court with a claim of unfair representation.”

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Miranda Fuel Co., Inc.

    326 F.2d 172 (2d Cir. 1963)   Cited 98 times

    No. 73, Docket 26232. Argued October 21, 1963. Decided December 11, 1963. Melvin J. Welles, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Herman M. Levy, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Samuel J. Cohen, New York City (Jack Last and Cohen Weiss, New York City, on the brief), for respondent Union. Ruth

  10. 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"