NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 825, IUOE, AFL-CIO, RESPONDENT

3d Cir. | 1970-01-28
No. 17859
420 F.2d 961 United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the Union violated the NLRA by expelling a member for filing an unfair labor practice charge without exhausting internal remedies.


Facts & Procedural History

The NLRB sought enforcement of an order against a Union that expelled a member for filing an unfair labor practice charge without exhausting internal …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of an order against International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 825, AFL-CIO 1 because the Board has found that the Union violated Section 8(b) (1) (A) of the National Labor Relations Act2 by expelling Domenic Tarantino from membership because he had filed an unfair labor practice charge against the Union without first exhausting his internal Union remedies. The Union also argues that the expulsion was merely the internal discipline of a Union member, not in the public domain and hence outside the jurisdiction of the Board.

We find no basis for the Union’s contentions in the law. The Board’s conclusions on these two points are correct. See NLRB v. Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, AFL-CIO, 391 U.S. 418, 88 S.Ct. 1717, 20 L.Ed.2d 706 (1968). The Union seeks to distinguish the cited decision by asserting that the charge which led to Tarantino’s expulsion was filed in bad faith and amounts to deliberate abuse of the Board’s processes.3 The Board, however, found to the contrary and there is substantial evidence to support its finding.

The order of the Board will be enforced.

. The Board’s decision and order, dated November 25, 196S, are reported at 173 N.L.R.B. 145.

. 29 U.S.O. § 158(b) (1) (A).

. Cf. Philadelphia Moving Picture Machine Operators’ Union, etc. v. NLRB, 382 F. 2d 598, 601, n. 1 (3 Cir. 1968).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw