Employer and Union were parties to a collective bargaining agreement in which Union had promised not to strike and each had promised to submit to binding arbitration at the request of the other. A dispute arose, and Union, in spite of the agreement, called a strike and began picketing Employer's building. After attempting unsuccessfully to invoke the grievance and arbitration procedures specified in the agreement, Employer obtained a temporary restraining order forbidding continuation of the strike Union then removed the case to the federal district court and moved to quash the state court's restraining order. Employer, in opposition, moved for an order compelling arbitration and prohibiting further strike activity. The district court found that the dispute was arbitrable under the collective bargaining agreement, that the strike constituted a breach of contract, and that Employer was undergoing irreparable injury. On these grounds, the lower court issued the orders Employer had requested. The court of appeals reversed, relying on the United States Supreme Court's earlier decision in Sinclair Refining Co. v. Atkinson, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Overruling Sinclair, the Court reversed and remanded the case with directions to enter a judgment affirming the order of the district court. Held: The Norris-LaGuardia Act does not prevent a federal court from enjoining a strike over a grievance which both parties are contractually bound to arbitrate. Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerk's Union, Local 770, 398 U.S. 235 (1970).
Labor Relations—Federal Court Injunctions Against Concerted Strike Activity: Norris-LaGuardia and Taft-Hartley Accommodated—Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerk;s Union, Local 770, 398 U.S. 235 (1970),
46 Wash. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol46/iss4/8