Document: 370 U.S. 711 82 S.Ct. 1293 8 L.Ed.2d 792 CHAUFFEURS, TEAMSTERS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 795, etc., et al., Petitioners,v.YELLOW TRANSIT FREIGHT LINES, INC., al. No. 13. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Oct. 11, 1961. June 25, 1962 David Previant, Milwaukee, Wis., for petitioners. Malcolm Miller, Wichita, Kan., respondents. PER CURIAM. 1 Reversed. Sinclair Rfg. Co. v. Atkinson, 195, 1328. 2 Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom DOUGLAS and HARLAN join, concurring. 3 Since it is clear that collective bargaining agreement involved in this case does not bind either party to arbitrate any dispute, I agree no injunction should be granted.* See 1328 (dissenting opinion). 4 FRANKFURTER took part decision case. 5 WHITE consideration or * The grievance machinery emphasizes voluntary settlements through negotiations between employer union representatives. Settlement first attempted local and, failing adjustment, negotiated settlement by a joint state committee consisting equal numbers If majority 'settles dispute,' '(s)uch will final binding on both parties.' fails settle then area representatives duly elected various committees. This last stage unless there at point submit unsettled disputes arbitration. Obviously, are free prevent For contract provisions are: '(d) Deadlocked cases may submitted umpire handling if Joint Area Committee determines such matter an decision. Otherwise shall permitted all legal economic recourse. '(f) In event strikes, work-stop-pages other activities which deadlock, default, failure comply decisions, interpretation Agreement tribunal upon Union affect legality lawfulness strike stipulates bound interpretation, being intention parties resolve questions mutual agreement. Nothing herein proceedings Employer where violation Agreement.'

Category: 6