NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 825, IUOE, AFL-CIO, RESPONDENT
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.
The court held that the Union violated the NLRA by expelling a member for filing an unfair labor practice charge without exhausting internal remedies.
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Exhaustion Of Internal Union Remedies cases and more on FLexlaw
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
Citator
Cited By
-
Sheet Metal Workers' Int'l Ass'n, Local NO. 355, Sheet Metal Workers' Int'l Ass'n, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 716 F.2d 1249 (9th Cir. 1983)
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 294, 470 F.2d 57 (2d Cir. 1972)
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Bhd. of Boilermakers, 581 F.2d 473 (5th Cir. 1978)
Authorities Cited
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Indus. Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of Am., Afl-Cio, 391 U.S. 418 (U.S. 1968)
- Philadelphia Moving Picture Mach. Operators' Union v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 382 F.2d 598 (3d Cir. 1967)