LUTHER M. YOUNG, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, APPELLEE

8th Cir. | 1970-04-01
No. 19793
424 F.2d 256 United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 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 an employer may discharge an employee at will if the labor contract does not limit this right and the discharge is not for protected union activity.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sued his employer alleging breach of the collective bargaining contract by discharge, despite the contract not limiting the employer's right…

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.

Young, the plaintiff, brought an action in the United States District Court under § 301 of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 185, alleging that Southwestern Bell, his employer, had breached its collective bargaining contract by discharging him at a time when he had less than three years’ service with the company.

Young sought reinstatement, back pay and restoration of all other rights. The labor contract does not limit the company in its right to discharge an employee with less than three years’ service. This is not disputed. The case was submitted to the court on cross-motions for summary judgment.

It is settled law that absent a contractual provision, the employer has the right to hire and discharge employees at will provided the motivating cause is not a protected union activity. See, e. g., Kellwood Co., Ottenheimer Bros. Mfg. Div. v. NLRB, 411 F. 2d 493 (8th Cir. 1969).

Chief Judge Henley, in a published memorandum opinion, thoroughly recites the facts and sets forth the applicable law. We agree with the conclusion reached and affirm the judgment on the basis of the district court opinion in Young v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 309 F.Supp. 475 (E.D.Ark.1969).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw