U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1974

United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Appellantcross v. United States Gypsum Company-Appellee-Cross

United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Appellantcross v. United States Gypsum Company-Appellee-Cross
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided July 31, 1974 · Bell, Ingraham, Per Curiam, Ro-Ney
498 F.2d 334; 87 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2075; 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 7380 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Appellantcross v. United States Gypsum Company-Appellee-Cross

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

(Opinion April 11, 1974, 5 Cir., 1974, 492 F.2d 713).

Before BELL, INGRAHAM and RO-NEY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

We are aware of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Howard Johnson Co., Inc. v. Detroit Loc. Jt. Exec. Bd., - U.S. -, 94 S.Ct. 2236, 41 L.Ed.2d 46 (1974), overruling the Sixth Circuit’s decision, 482 F.2d 489 (1973), that Howard Johnson, as a successor employer, was bound to arbitrate with the union concerning the extent of its obligations to its predecessor’s employees. Concluding that “there was plainly no substantial continuity of identity in the work force hired by Howard Johnson,” - U.S. at-, 94 S.Ct. at 2244, the Court held that Howard Johnson had no duty to arbitrate with the union. But, as we emphasize in our opinion, there was a substantial continuity of identity present in the case at bar. 492 F.2d at 716, 726. In short, we believe that the principles of Wiley remain viable in the circumstances of our case.

The petition for rehearing is in all respects denied.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.