Legal Opinion
Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 19, 1989No. 88-1PublishedCited by 599 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Blackmun
In this case, we must examine the concepts of “major” and “minor” disputes in the area of railway labor relations, articulate a standard for differentiating between the two, and apply that standard to a drug-testing dispute.
I
Since its formation in 1976, petitioner Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail), has required its employees to undergo physical examinations periodically and upon return from leave. These examinations include the testing of urine for blood sugar and albumin and, in some circumstances, for drugs. On February 20, 1987, Conrail announced unilaterally that urinalysis drug…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Virginian Railway Co. v. System Federation No. 40Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Co. v. BurleySupreme Court of the United States · 1945
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by599 opinions
- Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. v. NorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Billie Davenport v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Afl-CioCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1999
- Alaska Airlines v. Judy SchurkeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- In the Matter of Amoco Petroleum Additives Company and Buck Isbell, in the Matter of Robin A.G. Jackson, an Underwriter at Lloyd's, LondonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Ballew v. Continental Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
594 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.