Case Study:
A collective bargaining agreement existing between the Elevator Manufacturers’ Association of New York and Local 1 of the Elevator Workers Union contained a no-strike clause and a provision requiring arbitration of all “differences and disputes regarding the application and construction” of the agreement. The agreement also contained a provision governing emergency callbacks for employees after hours. When elevator repair was needed during the evening, employees who were called to work from the “night call list” were entitled to time-and-a-half wages. Otis Elevator, a signator of the agreement, instituted a policy under which it would screen all after-hours calls for elevator service. Otis would determine whether service was required immediately or whether repair could be postponed until the following workday. The union objected to the Otis “screening” system and requested that the policy be changed. Otis contended that it had a right to screen out “emergency” calls and refused to change its policy. In response to the company’s policy, the union directed its members not to perform any after-hours work for Otis. The union rejected a suggestion by Otis that the issue should be determined through the contractual grievance machinery. Subsequently, Otis petitioned the U.S. district court for an injunction against the union’s refusal to work overtime. The union argued that the court could not issue an injunction under the Norris-LaGuardia Act. May an injunction be issued by a court against a strike? If so, under what circumstances? Should an injunction be issued in this case? Decide. [Elevator Manufacturers’ Ass’n v. Local 2,111 LRRM 2631 (2d Cir.)]
Your answer must be, typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), one-inch margins on all sides, APA format and also include references.