Court Opinion

ID: 9453004
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 17:59:15.442592+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:33:27.303299
License: Public Domain

J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
Public Law 88-108 1 provides that the compulsory arbitration required in this case “shall be conducted pursuant to sections 7 and 8 of the Railway Labor Act.” Pub.L. 88-108, § 4. As I have indicated in my dissents in Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co., 127 U.S.App.D.C. -, 380 F.2d 603 (1967), and Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RR Co., 127 U.S. App.D.C. -, 380 F.2d 605 (1967), the Compulsory Arbitration Board convened pursuant to Public Law 88-108 cannot avoid this statutory requirement by delegating portions of this authority to local boards.
In these cases appellant makes the additional point that the local board deprived it of the minimum essentials of a full and fair hearing in that, among other things, it was denied a reasonable opportunity to prepare its case, to call witnesses, and to conduct cross-examination. The company, of course, argues that the board hearing was full and fair. Since, in violation of Section 7 of the Railway Labor Act2 and in spite of appellant’s request, no transcript of the proceedings before the local board was provided, I am unable to resolve this due process issue on this record.
I respectfully dissent.

. 77 Stat. 132 (1963), 45 U.S.C. § 157 (1964).

. 45 U.S.C. § 157 (1964).