Court Opinion

ID: 9460710
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 21:58:20.196418+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:36:44.909695
License: Public Domain

EDWARDS, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
Respectfully I submit that this case should not have been disposed of on defendants’ motions for summary judgment.
This record shows that appellant stated in affidavit form:
“Affiant says that he has been told by members of defendant union, U.A. W. Local 346, as well as by its officers, that affiant’s attempts at a promotion to Class A or Class B Electrician would be futile because affiant is a member of the Negro race, and neither said union nor defendant, Van Dorn Company, wants to employ a Negro at this or any other skilled trade.”
It also shows that no Negro was employed as an Electrician “B” at defendant company:
Interrogatory 8. The name, address, and badge number of each and every person of the Negro race who held one of the job classifications named in Interrogatory 6 above [‘Electrician Leader-Maintenance,’ ‘Electrician “A”-Maintenance,’ ‘Electrician “B”-Maintenance’], the name of said job and the inclusive dates of same.
“Answer: None.”
It also shows that no one had been asked to take a written examination for promotion to the electrician’s classification prior to appellant’s disputed application.
While these facts do not establish appellant’s entitlement to the job he seeks, they are sufficient for the purpose of deciding that his suit should not be dismissed on motion prior to trial.
I would reverse for hearing.