Local Union No. 2812, Lumber Production and Industrial Workers v. Missoula White Pine Sash Company, a Montana Corporation

Missoula White Pine Sash Co. (White Pine) discharged its fourteen most junior employees out of the 94 it had laid off, stating, “[W]e can see no reasonable expectations of being able to recall all our employees who are currently laid off due to the depressed economy.” Local Union No. 2812, Lumber Production and Industrial Workers (Union) appeals the district court’s judgment that the terminations were not a breach of the collective bargaining agreement between it and White Pine. We affirm, holding that the terminations were not a breach of the express provisions of the agreement nor did the agreement contain an implied covenant that White Pine could discharge its employees only for just cause.

No Breach of Express Covenant

The existence of an employee’s seniority rights or any limitation of an employer’s right to discharge must find its source in the collective bargaining agreement. Broniman v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, 353 F.2d 559, 561 (6th Cir.1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 907 , 86 S.Ct. 1343 , 16 L.Ed.2d 360 (1966). The agreement between White Pine and the Union contains a “Hire and Discharge” provision:

We agree with the district court that this provision…

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that White Pine may discharge any or all of its laid-off employees at any time, without regard to seniority. Its interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement *1388 ignores the contract’s declaration that “[a]ll employees shall have the right to work in the order of their seniority provided they are competent. Any employee who is laid off shall be returned to work at his regular status when operations are resumed.” By discharging laid-off workers, White Pine could destroy arbitrarily the workers’ contractual right to be rehired in order of seniority. It could also rehire these same employees in the future without the other benefits of seniority for which they bargained, such as the right to be laid off in order of seniority and the right of a senior employee to “bump” a less senior employee in another department if there were a cutback in the more senior employee’s department. The majority’s interpretation eliminates significant rights upon which the parties have agreed.

The Supreme Court has recognized that “in common parlance and in industrial parlance” a discharge is quite different from a lay-off, which occurs…

734 F.2d 1384 116 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2799 , 101 Lab.Cas. P 11,082 LOCAL UNION NO. 2812, LUMBER PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL WORKERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MISSOULA WHITE PINE SASH COMPANY, a Montana corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 83-3776. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 7, 1983. Decided June 12, 1984. Harland Bernstein, Bernard Jolles, Jolles, Sokol & Bernstein, P.C., Portland, Or., for plaintiff-appellant. Sherman V. Lohn, Garlingon, Lohn & Robinson, Missoula, Mont., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana. Before ANDERSON, FLETCHER, and FARRIS, Circuit Judges. J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: 1 Missoula White Pine Sash Co. (White Pine) discharged its fourteen most junior employees out of the 94 it had laid off, stating, "[W]e can see no reasonable expectations of being able to recall all our employees who are currently laid off due to the depressed economy." Local Union No. 2812, Lumber Production and Industrial Workers (Union) appeals the district court's judgment that the terminations were not a breach of the collective bargaining agreement between it and White Pine. We…