Document: 376 U.S. 543 84 S.Ct. 909 11 L.Ed.2d 898 JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC., Petitioner,v.David LIVINGSTON, etc. No. 91. Argued Jan. 9, 1964. Decided March 30, Charles H. Lieb, New York City, for petitioner. Irving Rosen, respondent. Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This is an action by a union, pursuant to § 301 Labor Management Relations Act, 61 Stat. 136, 156, 29 U.S.C. 185, compel arbitration under collective bargaining agreement. The major questions presented are (1) whether corporate employer must arbitrate with union agreement between and another corporation which has merged employer, and, if so, (2) courts or arbitrator appropriate body decide procedural prerequisites which, agreement, condition duty have been met. Because importance both realization national labor policy, we granted certiorari (373 908, 83 1300, 10 411) review judgment Court Appeals directing (313 F.2d 52), in reversal District had refused such relief (203 F.Supp. 171). We affirm below, but, respect first question above, on grounds may differ from those Appeals, whose answer that unclear. I. 2 65, Retail, Wholesale Department Store Union, AFL-CIO, entered into Pubishers, Inc., Interscience publishing firm, term expiring January 31, 1962. did not contain express provision making it binding successors Interscience. On October 2, 1961, petitioner, John Wiley Sons, ceased do business as separate entity. There no suggestion merger was genuine reasons. 3 At time about 80 employees, whom 40 were represented this Union. It single plant annual somewhat over $1,000,000. much larger concern, having office warehouse facilities 300 doing more than $9,000,000. None Wiley's employees union. 4 In discussions before after merger, Union (later Wiley) unable agree effect rights covered hired Wiley. Union's position despite continued represent taken Wiley, obligated recognize certain 'vested' Such rights, fully described concerned matters typically agreements, seniority status, severance pay, contended also required make pension fund payments called 5 though recognizing purposes its own plan service former asserted terminated all purposes. agent accede claims behalf employees. All except few who ended their employment pay here, employ. 6 No satisfactory solution reached, one week expiration date commenced arbitration. II. 7 threshold controversy shall provisions survived Wiley-Interscience so be operative against Both parties urge courts. Past cases leave doubt correct.1 'Under our decisions, he company bound arbitrate, well what issues matter determined basis contract parties.' Atkinson v. Sinclair Refining Co., 370 238, 241, 82 1318, 1320, 8 462. Accord, e.g., United Steelworkers America Warrior Gulf Navigation 363 574, 582, 1347, 1409. problem concededly party contained provision, agreed disputes particular kind. Here, itself sign claim depends, at agreement's provision. reason requiring determine issue same situations. being contractual origin, compulsory submission cannot precede judicial determination does fact create duty. Thus, just obligation fortiori, compelled clause bind all. unanimity views should arbitrability not, however, presage parties' accord correct decision. objecting arbitration, argues never that, any event, lost status representative when they mingled unit successor Interscience, latter's least sufficiently require arbitrate. relies 90 N.Y. Stock Corporation Law, McKinney's Consol.Laws, c. 59, provides, among other things, 'claim demand cause' constituent extinguished consolidation.2 Alternatively, apart 90, federal law requires go forward, lest policy favoring frequently undermined changes organization. 9 Federal law, fashioned 'from laws,' controls. Textile Workers Lincoln Mills, 353 448, 456, 77 912, 918, 972. State utilized far aid development principles application case, id., 457, 972, but ultimately results federal. hold disappearance automatically terminate circumstances, present past recognized central role Effectuating policy. supra, 578, 1351, 1409, 'the substitute industrial strife,' 'part parcel process itself.' would derogate '(t)he settling arbitration,' St elworkers Enterprise Wheel Car Corp., 593, 596, 1358, 1360, 1424, change structure ownership enterprise automatic consequence removing previously established; like present, where contracting disappears owner replaces entity remains same. Employees, represents them, ordinarily take part negotiations leading ownership. will concern wellbeing advantage disadvantage, potentially great, inevitably incidental main considerations. objectives reflected established rightful prerogative owners independently rearrange businesses even eliminate themselves employers balanced some protection sudden relationship. transition organization most eased strife avoided employees' continue resolved rather relative strength * contending forces,' Gulf, 580, 1352, 12 preference tests forces could overcome only considerations compellingly demanded. find none. While governing ordinary contracts unconsenting party,3 contract. '* (I)t generalized code govern myriad draftsmen wholly anticipate *.' covers whole calls new common law—the industry plant.' 578—579, 1409 (footnotes omitted). Central peculiar function fact, dictated circumstance, see requirements National real sense simple product consensual Therefore, although said, pp. 546—547, founded contract, impressive overborne construed.4 case readily assimilated category there whatever, none reasonably related sought obligated. predecessor, it. thus dispute construed context 13 every changed survives. As indicated lack substantial continui y identity something imposed without, found acts involved. So too, rule out possibility might abandon right failing known. Neither these situations Although substantially relevant similarity continuity operation across adequately evidenced wholesale transfer plant, apparently without difficulty. made known departed addition, suggest view surrounding certified union's following See, Board Aluminum Tubular Cir., 299 595, 598—600; McFarland, 306 219; Cruse Motors, 105 N.L.R.B. 242, 247. assert independent agreement; seeks based now expired, negotiate agreement.5 III. 14 Beyond denying all, urges grievances within scope clause. set complaint, are: 15 '(a) Whether built up accorded said 16 '(b) Whether, wage Company contributions 65 Security Plan Pension Fund 17 '(c) job security grievance full force effect. 18 '(d) obligate liable 1962 19 '(e) vacation contract.' Section 16.0 provides final stage procedures stated 'sole means obtaining adjustment' 'any differences, Employer arising relating interpretation application, enforcement number specific exceptions coverage grievan e procedures, applicable here.6 Apart intended wide breadth 16.9 irrelevant exception: 20 (T)he procedure herein forth sole exclusive remedy hereto hereby, claimed violations omissions committed either during (except enforce, vacate modify awards) lieu remedies, forums equity otherwise available conditions agreements submitted fail. Specific each them agreement.7 concerning subjects, arisen prior arbitrable. argues, plainly outside clause: first, because embrace post-merger claims, second, relate period beyond limited 21 probability, situation created expressly contemplated 1960. Fairly taken, demands collectively raise underlies litigation: What employees? inconsistent holding more, removed arbitrable 22 true framed 'now'—after agreement—but expired terms. Claimed least, unquestionably clause; understand become moot agreement.8 'after 1962,' reasonable read solely construction way discharge obligations notwithstanding agreement.9 why chose accrual expired. Of course, use acquire used nego iate existing renewal broken down. 23 merit light developed facts. sufficient unreasonable subject regarded nonarbitrable can seen advance award receive sanction. See 582—583, IV. 24 objection raises so-called 'procedural arbitrability.' third procedure. 'Step 1' 'a conference affected employee, Steward Employer, officer exempt supervisory person charge his department.' 2,' Employer's designated purpose, Shop Committee and/or Union.' Arbitration reached 3' 'in event settled 2."10 since Steps followed, arises Step 3, dispute.11 Specifically, 'procedural' met decided court arbitrator.12 25 think kind involved here down easily 'substantive' aspects. Questions arise vacuum; develop actual lights example, consistent refusal 'utterly futile—and little bit ridiculous follow steps Brief, p. 41. limitations n t controlling 'continuing.' These arguments response meaningless unless background 26 Doubt apply dispute, followed excused, unexcused failure avoids answered consideration merits one's responses depends large extent how answers bearing basic issue, merger; considered negotiation curious intertwined 'substance' 'procedure' growing raising facts carved two different forums, deciding other. logic nor result. 27 Once determined, have, submit grow bear disposition left arbitrator. Even contrary rule, deny confidently strictly 'procedural,' therefore purview court, operate bar altogether, merely limit qualify arbitral award. policies adoption preferred disputes, likely rare indeed. cases, goes remain free reconsider ground insofar bore using flexible approaches familiar Reservation difficult task separating issues, produce frequent duplication effort. 28 oppportunities deliberate delay well-intentioned less serious separation elements clear. determining 'substantive arbitrability,' unquestioned followed. acceptance attendant upon proceedings preliminary yet illustrates, entirely prospect speedy arbitrated settlement disadvantage (who, increased costs) aims justification generally undesirable result presumed intention parties. Refusal order subjects entail fractionating wish submitted. resist once arisen, best accords usual behind regard disagreements aspects play. 30 With reservation outset (p. 544 546, note 1, supr ), affirmed. 31 Affirmed. 32 GOLDBERG took decision case. below states arbitrability' decide.' 313 F.2d, 55. point, says: 'We interpret us Supreme decisions enunciating promoting peace stability, especially reference say consolidation preclude proceeding 56—57. Elsewhere, states: (W)e too expect proceed arbit ation representatives regarding substantive terms employee any, consolidation.' 57 (footnote Judge Kaufman, concurring separately thought 66. 'The creditors manner impaired, liability due due, cause stockholder thereof released impaired consolidation; consolidated deemed assumed liabilities corporations incurred obligations. stockholders respective liabilities, such, then pending tribunal party, abate discontinued consolidation, prosecuted judgment, into; substituted place corporation, pending.' But cf. general survives debts disappears. Fletcher, Private Corporations (1961 rev. ed.), 7121. Compare principle scrutinized evidence requires, reason, 'an dispute,' 1353, favored. majority prevent representing arises. Retail Clerks Int'l Ass'n., Local Unions Nos. 128 633, Lion Dry Goods, 369 17, 541, 503. conflict L. B. Spear 106 A.L.R.B. 687, covering received Problems give special treatment accrued mere problems cut off press premature speculate avoid hypothetical problems, disturbing relations plant. 16.5 provides: 'It addition elsewhere events, provisions, agreement: '(1) amendment modification '(2) salary minimum rates herein; '(3) '(4) pertaining extension agreement.' Other 'which events' §§ 4.2, 4.4, 6.4.1, 14.4, 16.9. Art. VI: Seniority; XV: Welfare Benefits; VII: Discharges Lay-offs; XXIII: Severance Pay; XII: Vacations. concedes accrue payable 'at future date.' 38. construes claims. 8, supra. objects comply 16.6, 'Notice filed four (4) weeks occurrence latest existence. file limitation abandonment grievance.' Courts disagreed issue. Seventh Circuits held Boston Mutual Life Ins. Co. Insurance Agents' 258 516; Brass Copper 19322 A.F.L.-C.I.O. American 272 849. Third, Fifth, Sixth Second Circuit's Radio Association Professional Engineering Personnel, 291 105; Deaton Truck Line, Inc. 612, 314 418; 748, International Electrical, Machine A.F.L.-C.I.O., Jefferson City Cabinet 192.

Category: 6