Schultz v. Owens-Illinois Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

31 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A major responsibility of negotiators is to weigh the relative advantages and disadvantages of differing proposals. ... The bargaining representative, whoever it may be, is responsible to, and owes complete loyalty to, the interests of all whom it represents. ... Inevitably differences arise in the manner and degree to which the terms of any negotiated agreement affect individual employees and classes of employees. The mere existence of such differences does not make them invalid. The complete satisfaction of all who are represented is hardly to be expected. A wide range of reasonableness must be allowed a statutory bargaining representative in servicing the unit it represents, subject always to complete good faith and honesty of purpose in the exercise of its discretion.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United Independent Flight Officers, Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc. · Swatts v. United Steelworkers of America

2. ““Justice Harlan wrote in Republic Steel [Corp. v. Maddox (1965), 379 U.S. 650 , 13 L. Ed. 2d 580 , 85 S. Ct. 615 ] that ‘[a]s a general rule *** federal labor policy requires that individual employees wishing to assert contract grievances must attempt use of the contract grievance procedure before requesting judicial intervention. 379 U.S. at 652 , 85 S. Ct. at 616 (emphasis in original). But the rule of Republic Steel is not absolute. In Glover v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway, 393 U.S. 324, 329-30 , 89 S. Ct. 548, 551-552 , 21 L. Ed. 2d 519 (1969), Justice Black noted ‘that the exhaustion requirement is subject to a number of exceptions for a variety of situations in which doctrinaire application of the exhaustion rule would defeat the overall purposes of federal labor relations policy.’ One of these exceptions involves facts which show, as they did in Glover, ‘that a formal effort to pursue contractual or administrative remedies would be absolutely futile.’ 393 U.S. at 331 , 89 S. Ct. at 552 (emphasis supplied).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 144 Ill. App. 3d 254 - Patterson v. Carbondale Community High School District No. 165

3. “The major goal of the duty of fair representation is to identify and protect individual expectations as far as possible without undermining collective interests. Where the individual and collective group interests clash, the former must yield to the latter. When collective bargaining agreements are executed, there may be many provisions which lead individual employees to believe they are entitled to specified benefits but, in the final analysis, the collective group interests must remain paramount. The nature of any labor policy requires an election between preserving group interests through democratic processes and adopting external restraint to protect the minority. Alvey v. General Elec. Co., 622 F.2d 1279, 1289 (7th Cir.1980) (quoting Tedford v. Peabody Coal Co., 533 F.2d 952, 956-57 (5th Cir.1976); accord Williams v. Western Elec. Co., 530 F.Supp. 481, 486 (N.D. Ill.1981).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 570 F. Supp. 1303 - Burman v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.