Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Brotherhood of Locomotive Eng'rs v. Springfield Terminal Ry.

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

April 5, 2000, Decided

No. 99-1328

Opinion

 [*22]  LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. This case requires us to decide whether the district court properly issued a Railway Labor Act ("RLA") injunction barring a wood products company controlled by owners of a railroad from doing switching work historically performed by the railroad's unions. See 45 U.S.C. § 151 and seq. The district court issued the injunction after finding that the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and United Transportation Union (the "Unions") were engaged in a "major" dispute with Springfield Terminal Railway Company ("Springfield") and that Springfield was using Aroostook and Bangor [**2]  Resources, Inc. ("ABR") to violate its collective bargaining agreement. Springfield and ABR (the "appellants") argue that ABR, although owned and controlled by Springfield's owners, is an independent wood products company not subject to the RLA and therefore not subject to the district court's order that it stop performing switching for Springfield customers while RLA mediation procedures are underway. We reject the contention that ABR is not subject to the injunctive provisions of the RLA, and we affirm both the district court's finding that there was a "major" dispute between Springfield and its Unions and the district court's injunction against ABR.

A. The Labor Dispute

We begin by sketching the facts of this labor dispute, reserving for later a more detailed discussion of the district court's findings. In doing so, "] we recite the facts in the light most favorable to the district court's findings of fact." Servicios Comerciales Andinos v. General Electric Del Caribe, Inc., 145 F.3d 463, 466 (1st Cir. 1998).

In 1995 the Unions and Springfield negotiated a collective bargaining agreement that governs the rates of pay, rules, and working conditions [**3]  for Springfield locomotive engineers, conductors, and trainmen. The agreement specifically provides that union employees "shall perform any and all services under the direct control of the Carrier required for the make up of trains and/or the movement of cars and trains over and through the Carrier's trackage and in its business of servicing industrial sidings."

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

210 F.3d 18 *; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 6241 **; 163 L.R.R.M. 2961

BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION, Plaintiffs, Appellees, v. SPRINGFIELD TERMINAL RAILWAY COMPANY, AROOSTOOK AND BANGOR RESOURCES, INC., Defendants, Appellants.

Subsequent History:  [**1]  Certiorari Denied November 27, 2000, Reported at: 2000 U.S. LEXIS 7842.

Prior History: APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE. Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge.

Disposition: Affirmed.

CORE TERMS

switching, piercing, carrier, district court, collective bargaining agreement, veil, cases, status quo, customers, railroad, subsidiary, corporate veil, mediation, injunction, negotiations, ownership, railway, courts, working conditions, related corporation, corporate form, alter ego, employees, Locomotive, defeat, terms, non-union, Terminal, disputes, wholly owned

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, Business & Corporate Compliance, Labor & Employment Law, Collective Bargaining & Labor Relations, Bargaining Subjects, Governments, Courts, Authority to Adjudicate, Pretrial Matters, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Mediation, Remedies, Injunctions, General Overview, Labor & Employment Law, Enforcement of Bargaining Agreements, Appellate Jurisdiction, Final Judgment Rule, Transportation Law, Rail Transportation, Safety Appliance Act, Couplers, Banking Law, Federal Acts, Federal & State Interrelationships, Federal Common Law, Preliminary Considerations, Erie Doctrine, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Federal Questions, Common Law, Protected Activities, Strikes & Work Stoppages, Business & Corporate Law, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Alter Ego, Torts, Vicarious Liability, Corporations, Subsidiary Corporations, Shareholder Duties & Liabilities, Judgments, Relief From Judgments, Corporate Formalities, Corporate Finance, Initial Capitalization & Stock Subscriptions, Standards of Review, Clearly Erroneous Review, De Novo Review, Trials, Bench Trials