finding that Section 2, First imposed a duty on a union to prevent its members from “collectively disrupt[ing] Delta's flight operations, in contravention of the CBA . . . , by way of a no-overtime campaign”
How later courts described this case
- finding that Section 2, First imposed a duty on a union to prevent its members from “collectively disrupt[ing] Delta's flight operations, in contravention of the CBA . . . , by way of a no-overtime campaign”
- holding that the district court erred in refusing to enjoin a pilots’ union where the union had not done “everything possible” to stop its members’ no-overtime campaign
- noting that, under the Railway Labor Act, “[a] failure by either side to maintain the status quo during the bargaining and mediation process may give rise to injunctive relief, even without the customary showing of irreparable injury”
- ordering district court to issue "appropriate injunc-tive relief directing union to take further steps to end the pilots' no-overtime campaign”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BARKETT, Circuit Judge,
concurring specially, in which MAGILL, Circuit Judge, joins:
I concur in the determination that under the law ALPA has an affirmative duty to exert every reasonable effort to prevent or stop the unilateral unlawful activity of its members and that it has not fulfilled that duty. Accordingly, I agree that this case should be remanded for the entry of an appropriate injunction requiring ALPA to take all reasonable steps to do so. However, any discussion of possible actions based on the possibility that ALPA cannot control its membership is premature.