Legal Opinion · Dissent

Union Pacific Railroad Company v. United Transportation Union, Also Known as C & T, Also Known as Utu Kent H. Madison

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided September 27, 1993No. 92-2547Published

1DissentMeMILLIAN, Circuit Judge

For the reasons discussed below, I cannot agree with the majority opinion’s holding that federal courts can vacate arbitration awards under the Railway Labor Act on public policy grounds. Accordingly, I would reverse the decision of the district court and enforce the decision of the Board reinstating the employee, subject to the usual back-to-work examination, and awarding him back pay less 90 days for mishandling the switch.

Whether there is a public policy exception under the Railway Labor Act is a difficult question. On the one hand, as noted by the majority opinion, the scope of judicial…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United Paperworkers International Union v. Misco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. W. R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 759, International Union of the United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Air Line Pilots Ass'n v. O'NeillSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Jacksonville Terminal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. Union Pacific Railroad v. SheehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API