United Ass'n of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry, Local Union No. 342 v. Bechtel Construction Co.

The main issue in this case is whether, when two.unions signed an arbitration agreement for jurisdictional disputes but did not fill in the name of the arbitrator, the court could hold them to the agreement and fill in the name.

FACTS

Two unions, a Pipefitters local and an Ironworkers local, signed project agreements, involving numerous other unions as well, to build oil refineries. The project agreements provided that the unions would not strike or stop work because of jurisdictional disputes among them, and would resolve any such disputes by the participating locals if possible. If the locals could not resolve a dispute, then it would be referred to their internationals. If the international unions were unable to resolve the dispute within 15 days, then either local could refer the dispute “to _, who will act as arbitrator.”

Authorized representatives of the many unions working on the project, including the Ironworkers 1 and Pipefitters 2 , signed the two contracts.

A jurisdictional dispute arose between the Pipefitters and the Ironworkers about “first drop” work. That means each union- claimed the right to have its members do unloading, handling, and rigging of pipe…