International Association of MacHinists Etc. v. Howmet Corporation, Menasco Manufacturing Company’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 21 Md. App. 307 - Bel Pre Medical Center, Inc. v. Frederick Contractors, Inc. (1974), 40 Cal. 3d 406 - Dryer v. Los Angeles Rams (1985)
11 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co. · John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston · Tobacco Workers International Union v. Lorillard Corp.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he underlying objective of the policy favoring the resolution of disputes by arbitration is that of avoiding industrial strife and promoting industrial harmony through a fair, fast, and flexible system utilizing neutral but knowledgeable “peace-makers.” That objective is served by a strong judicial policy ... of broadly construing the arbitration clauses of collective bargaining agreements and requiring the disputing parties to arbitrate whenever their agreement is possibly susceptible of an interpretation permitting such action. However, when situations arise, as here, in which the objective of avoiding industrial strife and disharmony would not be served by compelling arbitration, a court has the obligation to examine the potential consequences of compelling arbitration and to tailor its order accordingly.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Congress, however, has by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, assigned the courts the duty of determining whether the reluctant party has breached his promise to arbitrate. For arbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit. Yet, to be consistent with congressional policy in favor of settlement of disputes by the parties through the machinery of arbitration, the judicial inquiry under § 301 must be strictly confined to the question whether the reluctant party did agree to arbitrate the grievance or did agree to give the arbitrator power to make the award he made. An order to arbitrate the particular grievance should not be denied unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Doubts should be resolved in favor of coverage.” (Footnote omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“An award issued by the arbitrator which gave the Union any relief on these issues would, we believe, foster rather than alleviate industrial disharmony by forcing the employer to arbitrate with one union issues which touched the very heart of the employer's collective bargaining agreement with another union.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.