About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

47 Minn. L. Rew. 531 (1962-1963)
Labor Arbitration and Federal Pre-emption: The Overruling of Black v. Cutter Laboratories

handle is hein.journals/mnlr47 and id is 541 raw text is: Labor Arbitration and Federal Pre-emption: The Overruling of Black v. Cutter Laboratories In the 1956 case of Black v. Cutter Laboratories, the United States Supreme Court exhibited some judicial hos- tility toward the labor arbitration process by allowing a state court to overturn an arbitration board determination that an employee had been fired for her union activity and not for her communist affiliations. In this Article, Pro- fessor Kovarsky examines the opinions of the arbitration board, the California Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court in the Black case, and then analyzes subsequent United States Supreme Court decisions involv- ing both communism and judicial review of arbitration awards in labor disputes. He concludes on the basis of these later cases that Black v. Cutter Laboratories has been impliedly overruled and that a federal policy de- ferring to arbitration avards in labor disputes has been announced that pre-empts the field. Irving Kovarsky* The substantial use of labor arbitration as a democratic means of resolving employer-union differences is a twentieth century development. During the formative years of the United States, in- dustrialists, economists, and judges exhibited hostility toward unions, and the growth of organized labor and collective bargain- ing was retarded. Since unions were not in a position to make many demands, even in the limited industrial areas where collec- tive bargaining was practiced, labor arbitration was resorted to in- frequently. Starting with the Railway Labor Act of 1926,' the Norris-La Guardia Act of 1932,2 and the National Labor Rela- *Associate Professor, Department of Management, Southern Illinois University. The author wishes to thank Philip T. Legendre, graduate student at Southern Illinois University, for his assistance. 1. 44 Stat. 577 (1926), as amended, 45 U.S.C. §§ 151-88 (1958). 2. 47 Stat. 70 (1932), 29 U.S.C. §§ 101-15 (1958). See § 102, which discloses the need for union representation, and § 108, which specifies that:

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most