Collective Bargaining Agreement Lawsuit

In Association of Westinghouse Salaried Employees v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 348 U.S. 437, 75 S.Ct. 489, 99 L.Ed. 510, the Supreme Court stated that the Supreme Court has not authorized an appeal by a union requesting a judgment on the unpaid wages earned against each worker under the collective agreement. In this case, the defendant employer naturally invokes this case. The reason, I think this union is not the employer in this lawsuit after . 301 is that the right to workers` wages is created from separate leases between the employer and each employee. The union does not commit to working for the employer, or even to equip the workers. The obligation to pay wages to an employee arises from the individual contract between the employer and the worker and not from the collective agreement. Therefore, there is no breach of contract between an employer and a labour organization, as is the case with jurisdiction.

301. The facts show an alleged breach of contract between an employer and an employee – a situation that is not covered by law. Id., Part 2, at 3-4, 10-14. The section they suggested was: „SEC. — . (a) Complaints of breach of a contract entered into as a result of collective bargaining between an employer and a labour organization where such a contract affects trade within the meaning of this Act may be brought before any U.S. district court competent for the parties. „b) Any organization of work whose activities affect trade within the meaning of this Act is bound by the actions of its duly accredited representatives acting within its remit by that labour organization and may be sued or prosecuted as an entity and on behalf of the workers it represents in the United States courts. The property is enforceable. has its own way.

I cannot believe that Congress, by the National Labor Relations Act, is as originally adopted, or amended by section 301, intended to take actions that individuals have freely exercised in this country, at least since the concept of ordinary procedure has been recognized in our jurisprudence as a guiding principle.