Case Name: James D. HODGSON, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellee, v. BALTIMORE REGIONAL JOINT BOARD, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1972-06-16
Citations: 462 F.2d 180
Docket Number: No. 71-1728
Parties: James D. HODGSON, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellee, v. BALTIMORE REGIONAL JOINT BOARD, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 462
Pages: 180–181

Head Matter:
James D. HODGSON, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellee, v. BALTIMORE REGIONAL JOINT BOARD, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, Appellant.
No. 71-1728.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. .
Argued May 30, 1972.
Decided June 16, 1972.
Bernard W. Rubenstein, Baltimore, Md. (Jacob J. Edelman, Bernard P. Jeweler, and Edelman, Levy, & Rubenstein, Baltimore, Md. on brief), for appellant.
Carin Ann Clauss, Asst. Sol., U. S. Department of Labor (Richard F. Schubert, Solicitor of Labor, Donald S. Shire, Anastasia T. Dunau, Sylvia S. Ellison, Attys., Washington, D. C., and Louis Weiner, Regional Sol., on brief), for ap-pellee.
Before SOBELOFF, Senior Circuit Judge, and WINTER and CRAVEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Baltimore Regional Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers of Amer ica, AFL-CIO [Union] prosecutes this appeal from a judgment of the District Court imposing upon it joint and several liability with Sagner, Inc., a clothing manufacturer. The employer discriminated against certain women employees by paying them less than their male counterparts for equivalent work. Sag-ner finally admitted the discrimination and offered to make restitution. But at the instigation of the appellant Union and in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.t the major part of the arrearage due was diverted to increase the pay of another group of employees also represented by the Union.
For reasons sufficiently indicated by the District Court, Hodgson v. Sagner, Inc., 326 F.Supp. 371 (D.Md.1971), we agree that the court was within its general equitable powers in imposing such liability upon the Union. The judgment is therefore
Affirmed.