Pennsylvania v. Local Union 542, International Union of Operating Engineers

502 F. Supp. 7, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10525
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedAugust 8, 1979
Docket71-2698
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 502 F. Supp. 7 (Pennsylvania v. Local Union 542, International Union of Operating Engineers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pennsylvania v. Local Union 542, International Union of Operating Engineers, 502 F. Supp. 7, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10525 (E.D. Pa. 1979).

Opinion

A. LEON HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge. *

[[Image here]]

I. DEFINITIONS

1. As used herein, unless the context clearly requires a different meaning, the *8 term “defendants” shall refer to the following:

(a) Local 542, International Union of Operating Engineers (Local 542);

(b) Operating Engineers Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee of Philadelphia, Eastern Pennsylvania and Delaware (JATC);

(c) Cofttractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania (CAEP), General Building Contractors Association, Inc. (GBCA), United Contractors Association (UCS), Pennsylvania Excavating Contractors Association (PECA), and all other employer associations who have been parties to a collective bargaining agreement with Local 542 at any time between November 8, 1965 and the date of this Decree; and,

(d) Glasgow, Inc., and all other employers who have been parties to a collective bargaining agreement with Local 542 and who hired at least one operating engineer affiliated with Local 542 at any time between November 8, 1965, and the date of this Decree.

2. As used herein, the term “collective bargaining agreement” shall mean the labor agreement currently in effect between Local 542 and participating contractors and contractors associations or, where the context so requires, a subsequent version of that agreement.

3. As used herein, the term “first year” shall mean the period beginning on the date of this Decree, and ending on March 31, 1980. Each subsequent year will begin on April 1 and end the following March 31st.

4. (a) As used herein, the term “minority” or “minorities” shall include blacks, Spanish-surnamed Americans, Asians, and American Indians.

(b) As used herein, the term “percentage of minorities in the community” or similar terms refer to the percentage of minority males between the ages of 18 and 65 in the population. The percentage of minorities in the community for each district is set forth in paragraph 16.

II. PERMANENT INJUNCTION

5. Defendants shall not discriminate against any minority person because of his color or national origin, with respect to acquisition, retention of membership or affiliation in said local union, with respect to referral and selection for employment, with respect to any training, retraining or upgrading programs, or with respect to any other terms and conditions of employment, union membership or affiliation.

6. No person shall be retaliated or discriminated against by any of the defendants, their agents, officers, employees or their successors in office, because that person has opposed any practice of defendants challenged in this lawsuit, because that person is a member of the class represented by plaintiffs or because that person has made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in any manner in any stage of the investigation, proceeding or hearing of this case.

7. Moreover, it shall be a violation of this Judgment and Decree for any defendant to deny, deprive, or attempt to deny or deprive, any individual member of the plaintiff class of a right or benefit to which he is entitled by the terms and provisions of the Judgment and Decree. It is the Court’s specific purpose and intent in entering this order that all members of the plaintiff class shall share and participate equally, to the maximum extent possible, in the class-wide employment opportunities and rights created herein. It shall be a violation of the Decree, therefore, for any defendant to single out particular plaintiff class members for the purpose of denying them any relief herein to which they are' entitled.

8. Further, a strike, work-stoppage or work slowdown by any officers, agents, members or affiliates of Local 542, or by any persons acting in concert with any offi *9 cers, agents, members or affiliates of Local 542, which has as its purpose the interference with the operation of this Decree, shall constitute a violation of this Decree. Local 542 is obligated to make a good faith effort to prevent or end any such violations. Such a violation shall subject Local 542, its officers, agents, members and affiliates participating in the strike, work-stoppage or work slowdown to the contempt power of the Court. This clause shall operate regardless of whether the strike, work-stoppage or work slowdown is authorized by Local 542. However, nothing in this Decree shall prohibit a strike, work-stoppage or work slowdown by Local 542, its officers, agents, members or affiliates, the purpose of which is other than the interference with or the thwarting of the operation of this Decree.

III. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

9. Pursuant to Local Rule 46 and 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court shall designate a United States Magistrate for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to have primary responsibility for overseeing the implementation of this Decree.

10. (a) Except for any matter expressly required by this Decree to be presented directly to the Court, any disputes among the parties regarding the interpretation or implementation of this Decree shall be presented in the first instance to the Magistrate. No party shall present any dispute to the Magistrate unless the party has first notified the other affected parties and made a good faith effort to resolve the matter by agreement. Unless the Decree or an order of this Court specifies a different period, any party may appeal any decision of the Magistrate under this Decree, including any decision made pursuant to this paragraph, by filing a request for review with this Court within ten (10) days of such decision. Delays beyond this ten day period shall be allowed upon a showing of good cause.

(b) In addition to the powers specified in this Judgment and Decree, the Magistrate shall be empowered to take all actions, including the establishment of such record-keeping requirements, as may be deemed necessary to implement and insure strict compliance with the terms and provisions of this Decree. The Magistrate shall hear and determine all complaints concerning the operation of this Judgment and Decree and shall decide any questions of interpretation, claims of violations, and questions of remedies that may be necessary and appropriate. The Magistrate shall act either on his own initiative or at the request of any interested person or party. All decisions of the Magistrate shall be either in writing or dictated to a court reporter who shall prepare a transcript of such decisions.

Nothing contained herein shall give the Magistrate the right to amend or modify the substantive terms and provisions of this Judgment and Decree, other than as specifically granted, nor shall the Magistrate have any power and authority other than that granted to him in this Judgment and Decree. Any request for modification of this Decree or any of its provisions, other than those modifications that the Magistrate is specifically empowered to make, shall be submitted directly to the Court. The Magistrate shall have the power to suggest modifications or amendments of this Judgment and Decree.

11.

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

Related

United States v. Shabazz
District of Columbia, 2021
Jackson v. LOCAL 542, OPERATING ENGINEERS
155 F. Supp. 2d 332 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2001)
Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania v. Local Union 542
807 F.2d 330 (Third Circuit, 1986)
Commonwealth v. Local Union 542
807 F.2d 330 (Third Circuit, 1986)
Green v. United States Steel Corp.
640 F. Supp. 1521 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
502 F. Supp. 7, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pennsylvania-v-local-union-542-international-union-of-operating-engineers-paed-1979.