Clark v. Claremont Apartment Hotel Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentBeals, J.
(dissenting) —Respondent Claremont Apartment Hotel Company, in its answer, pleaded by way of affirmative defense that appellant, by his conduct, had estopped himself from claiming any amount as salary greater than that which he had received.
Appellant was a member of the union in question, and the union was entitled to represent him and its other members as their bargaining agency. In making contracts with employers, the union acts as the agent of the group of the employees of a particular employer who are members of the union. The right of employees to bargain collectively is firmly…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Piercy v. Louisville & Nashville Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
- Huston v. Washington Wood & Coal Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1940