Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-2528 International Union v. ZF Boge Elastmetall, LLC

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 22, 2011//

10-2528 International Union v. ZF Boge Elastmetall, LLC

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 22, 2011//

Listen to this article

Labor
Mid-term modifications

A mid-term modification of a CBA did not create vested rights that prohibited the employer from closing a plant.
“The Union relies heavily on the mid-term Agreement’s limitation on renegotiation of the new terms during the next round of bargaining. In the Union’s view, because this obligation persisted beyond the date of expiration of the CBA, the mid-term Agreement and the specific obligation to maintain the Paris facility after consolidation also carried independent and longer-lasting significance. The Union believes that this term demonstrates that, even if the contract is primarily a modification to the CBA, it also has the force of a stand-alone agreement, unencumbered by the duration clause of the CBA. Although the Union’s position on this language has some initial appeal, the real significance of this language is that it demonstrates that the parties formulated the mid-term Agreement on the premise that their future relationship would be governed by a future CBA. Indeed, the fact that the 2007 terms were not open to negotiation is rendered meaningless without a successive CBA in which those terms would have continued to operate. The underlying promises do not, of their own force, bind the parties outside of the context of the CBA that they modified.”

Affirmed.

10-2528 International Union v. ZF Boge Elastmetall, LLC

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McCuskey, J., Ripple, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests