Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gould Storage Battery Corp. v. United Electrical

Decided: August 24, 1948.

GOULD STORAGE BATTERY CORPORATION, A CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL NO. 108, DEFENDANT



On petition for arbitration.

For the petitioner, Katzenbach, Gildea & Rudner (William V. Lee (Kenneth Souser, of the Pennsylvania bar), of counsel).

For the defendant, Louis H. Wilderman.

Before Justice Burling.

Burling

[137 NJL Page 522] BURLING, J. This is an application for an order directing the parties to arbitrate certain provisions of a collective bargaining agreement. It is made pursuant to the statute of

this state relating to arbitration and award under the procedure prescribed in R.S. 2:40-12 which reads as follows:

"A party aggrieved by the failure, neglect or refusal of another to perform under a written agreement providing for arbitration, may petition a justice of the supreme court or judge of a circuit court for the county where either party resides, for an order directing that the arbitration proceed in the manner provided for in the agreement. Five days' notice in writing of the application shall be served personally upon the party defaulting."

The facts have been stipulated and so far as they are necessary to a determination of the question are as follows:

Prior to June 28th, 1947, the plant or factory which is now owned and operated by the petitioner, was owned and operated by the Philco Corporation. On or about May 6th, 1947, the Philco Corporation and the defendant Union entered into a collective bargaining agreement containing certain terms and provisions as to the wages, hours and working conditions of the employees in said plant or factory represented by the Union.

On or about June 28th, 1947, the petitioner purchased said plant or factory from the Philco Corporation and shortly thereafter entered into a verbal agreement with the defendant Union to assume the rights and obligations of the Philco Corporation as the employer of said employees under such agreement. This verbal agreement was confirmed by letter dated July 16th, 1947, and accepted by the defendant Union on the same date. Said agreement of May 6th, 1947, as assumed and accepted by the petitioner, now continues in full force and effect.

The collective bargaining agreement of May 6th, 1947, provides in Article XVIII thereof as follows:

"Section 1. Nothing herein contained shall subject the following matters to arbitration; namely wages, hours, Union recognition, strikes, slow-down, stoppage of work or lockout.

"Section 2. The Union will under no circumstances condone any strike, stoppage or slow-down. It will at no time instigate such a strike, stoppage or slow-down. The Company will not at ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.