Laborers District Council of Alabama, on Behalf of Laborers International Local 559 v. McDowell Contractors, Inc.

680 F.2d 94, 110 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2965, 3 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1813, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17703
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided July 6, 1982·No. 81-7765·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal, we are asked whether a union or its pension fund may enforce the provisions of an area-wide “prehire” labor agreement1 against a construction contractor building a project within the covered area, when the union has not shown that it represents a majority of those working on the project in question.

In proceedings below, the district court held: (1) that in the absence of a showing of a union majority at a given project, the terms of an area-wide prehire labor agreement would not be enforceable against the employer with respect to that project; and (2) that if the union could not enforce the terms of the prehire agreement, neither could its pension fund. Dissatisfied with the district court’s ruling, the plaintiff union and pension fund trustees brought this appeal.

We find that the issues presented herein are controlled by clear precedent. On the basis of the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Kaiser Steel Corporation v. Mullins, et al., -U.S.-, 102 S.Ct. 851, 70 L.Ed.2d 833 (1982)2 and the Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision set forth in N. L. R. B. v. Haberman Construction Company, 641 F.2d 351 (5th Cir. 1981),3 the decision of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Laborers District Council of Alabama, on Behalf of Laborers International Local 559 v. McDowell Contractors, Inc., 680 F.2d 94, 110 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2965, 3 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1813, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17703 (11th Cir. 1982).

680 F.2d 94 (Laborers District Council of Alabama, on Behalf of Laborers International Local 559 v. McDowell Contractors, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related