Legal Opinion

Lewiston - Auburn Shoeworkers Protective Ass'n v. Federal Shoe, Inc.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided March 16, 1955PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTirrell, J.

On report. This is an action to enforce an arbitration award. Plaintiff is an independent labor union acting as bargaining agent for approximately 3500 shoe workers. Defendant is an employer engaged in shoe manufacture and a party with other employers to a labor-management contract covering wages, hours and conditions of employment bargained with them by plaintiff. In March, 1953 a dispute arose concerning vacation pay of defendant’s employees. Article XI of the basic contract provides as part of the grievance machinery:

“STEP #4. In the event the grievance shall not have been satisfactorily…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh Union Stock Yards Co. v. Pittsburgh Joint Stock Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Call v. HagarSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1879
  3. Conant v. ArsenaultSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1919
  4. Cushing v. BabcockSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1853

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Danbury Rubber Co. v. Local 402, United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
  2. Jannis v. EllisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API