From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Wittlaufer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 3, 1950
277 App. Div. 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 1950)

Opinion

May 3, 1950.

Appeal from Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


The Industrial Commissioner determined that claimant lost his employment as a result of an industrial controversy. Claimant, an electrician, filed for benefits on May 10, 1948. He was employed on a job at the Western Electric Company in Buffalo, N.Y., until April 30, 1948. He was a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local No. 41, an A.F. of L. affiliate, and had belonged to that union since 1924. On May 1, 1948, a strike occurred by A.F. of L. unions in the building trades, not including Local No. 41, and picket lines were maintained around the Western Electric Company plant by members of certain trade unions. Local No. 41 had no controversy with the employer and none with the Western Electric Company. Claimant refused to cross the picket line at the Western Electric Company plant. He did, however, report for work on that day. The employer had other work and claimant made known his availability to do other work but the employer was unable to give him such employment. It appeared that no electricians were on strike and the referee and the board found that claimant did not lose his employment as the result of a strike at the establishment where he was employed. Decision affirmed, with costs to the claimant against the employer-appellant.


This case differs from Matter of Bucklaew ( Robertson Elec. Co.) ( ante, p. 805) which is being decided herewith in that the only evidence as to the reason why this claimant did not cross the picket line and continue his employment was that he elected to respect it as a matter of principle and that his decision in that regard was "strictly his individual prerogative." There was also evidence that had he not made such decision he would not have suffered unemployment because his employer had work available for him at the workplace to which he was assigned. Thus, in effect he initiated a labor controversy with his employer as a result of which he lost employment. This, in my opinion, was initially determined correctly by the Industrial Commissioner.


Summaries of

Matter of Wittlaufer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 3, 1950
277 App. Div. 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 1950)
Case details for

Matter of Wittlaufer

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of WILLIAM K. WITTLAUFER, Claimant. FERGUSON…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: May 3, 1950

Citations

277 App. Div. 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 1950)

Citing Cases

Matter of Freeman

(Labor Law, § 592, subd. 1.) The critical issue thus defined was correctly decided by the board on the…

Matter of Buckley

Upon the facts of this case, the board's finding that the claimants' unemployment was not due to an…