Stove, Furnace v. Weyerhaeuser

2 Citing cases

  1. Oil, Chemical Atomic Wkrs. v. Amoco Oil

    885 F.2d 697 (10th Cir. 1989)   Cited 22 times
    In Amoco, the Tenth Circuit held "that Boys Markets injunctions are available to enjoin employer breaches of collective bargaining agreements which threaten the arbitral process."

    Several other district court opinions have treated the drug testing issue in the Boys Markets context. Two opinions reach conclusions consistent with Metropolitan Edison. In Stove, Furnace Allied Applicance Workers' Int'l, Local 185 v. Weyerhaeuser Paper Co., 650 F. Supp. 431 (S.D. Ill. 1986), the union contended that the testing program could in certain circumstances invade the privacy of its members and result in a "`black mark' on the[ir] personnel records." Id. at 433.

  2. Indep. Oil Workers Union v. Mobil Oil

    777 F. Supp. 391 (D.N.J. 1991)   Cited 5 times
    Noting the applicability of health and safety provisions to a drug and alcohol testing program in finding the program subject to arbitration

    rm, and the Tenth holding that there is a threat of irreparable harm. See, e.g., Communications Workers of America v. U.S. West Communications, 744 F. Supp. 1031, 1033-34 (D.Colo. 1990) (irreparable harm); Aeronautical Industrial District Lodge 776 v. General Dynamics Corp., 738 F. Supp. 1038, 1041 (N.D.Tex. 1990) (no irreparable harm); Association of Chemical Employees v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co., Inc., 701 F. Supp. 1282, 1288 (S.D.W. Va. 1988) (no irreparable harm); International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers System Council U-4 v. Florida Power and Light Co., 678 F. Supp. 257, 258 (S.D.Fla. 1987) (irreparable harm); International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Metropolitan Edison Co., No. 86-4426, slip op. at 7-8 (E.D.Pa. Aug. 14, 1986) (1986 WL 376) (irreparable harm); Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union v. Amoco Oil Co., 651 F. Supp. 1, 5 (D.Wyo. 1986) (no irreparable harm); Stove, Furnace and Applied Appliance Workers' International Union, Local 185, AFL-CIO v. Weyerhaeuser Paper Co., 650 F. Supp. 431, 433 (S.D.Ill. 1986) (irreparable harm); International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1900 v. Potomac Electric Power Co., 634 F. Supp. 642, 644 (D.D.C. 1986) (no irreparable harm). In addition to disagreeing about the extent and legal cognizability of the types of harm caused by the execution of random drug and alcohol testing programs, courts basically disagree about the legal standard to be applied. For instance, in the view of some courts, there cannot be a finding of irreparable harm unless arbitration will be rendered completely useless in the absence of an injunction, such as where a unilateral decision is made to close a plant.