Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rite Aid of Pennsylvania, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1776

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided February 16, 2010No. 09-1989Published

1DissentAmbro, Circuit Judge

The Majority concludes that the Union’s grievances are not arbitrable based on its assessment of the merits of the Union’s claims. Because I do not believe that analysis is authorized by either Supreme Court precedent or our own precedent, I respectfully dissent.

I. Background

To review, United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 1776 (the “Union” or “Local 1776”), has represented Rite Aid employees in 24 Pennsylvania counties for *138several decades. In June 2007, Rite Aid acquired a drugstore chain formerly operated by Brooks Eckerd. Several of these stores are located in counties covered by…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  5. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. LivingstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1964

14 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