Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1384 and the Amalgamated Council of Greyhound Divisions, Afl-Cio v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., a Corporation

Bad Law
550 F.2d 1237·95 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2097·1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 14018
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 1, 197775-2776California768 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sneed, J.

In our original opinion, Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1384 v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 529 F.2d 1073 (9th Cir. 1976), we affirmed the issuance of a preliminary injunction under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185 , in favor of Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1384, AFL-CIO and Amalgamated Council of Greyhound Divisions, AFL-CIO (Union). This injunction compelled the employer, Greyhound Lines, Inc. (Greyhound), to maintain the status quo pending arbitration of a dispute concerning Greyhound’s right under the collective bargaining agreement to alter the status quo, to wit, the employees’ work schedule. The Supreme Court vacated our judgment and remanded the case to us “for further consideration in light of Buffalo Forge Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, 428 U.S. 397 , 96 S.Ct. 3141 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1022 (1976).” Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1384, 429 U.S. 807 , 97 S.Ct. 43 , 50 L.Ed.2d 68 (1976). Having considered the impact of Buffalo Forge on the case before us, we now reverse the judgment of the district court.

In Buffalo Forge, the Supreme Court held that a preliminary injunction cannot issue against a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.