Film Technicians of the Motion Picture Industry, Local 683 v. Color Corp. of America

NOURSE (Paul), J. pro tem.

*

Respondents have moved this court to dismiss the appeal taken by the appellant from an order made by the trial court, resubmitting to the arbitrator the issues framed by an agreement for arbitration.

The appellant was a party to a collective bargaining agreement with each of the respondents. Each of the agreements contained a provision for the payment by appellant to its

[554]

employees of dismissal pay. They also provided for the submission to arbitration of any grievances claimed by the employees or the union representing them, including grievances as to the failure of the appellant to pay dismissal pay in accordance with the terms of the collective bargaining agreements.

Between the 1st of January, 1954, and March 31, 1954, the appellant dismissed certain of its employees, and thereafter dismissed others. Appellant claimed it was not obligated to pay dismissal pay, and respondents asserted that it was.

The parties agreed to submit the grievances arising under all contracts to one arbitrator. By the terms of the arbitration agreement, the following issues were submitted to the arbitrator:

“(a) Is the Color Corporation of America in violation of Paragraph 74 of the collective bargaining agreements with the Unions by reason of its failure to pay dismissal pay to qualified employees thereunder?

“ (b) If the answer to (a) above is in the affirmative, which employees are qualified for such dismissal pay and in what amounts ? ’ ’

The arbitrator, after hearings, made his award in writing. By his award he determined the first issue in favor of respondents and found that appellant was in violation of the collective bargaining agreements by reason of its failure to pay dismissal pay to qualified employees.

As to the second issue he found that certain named employees who were dismissed after March 31, 1954, were qualified and entitled to dismissal pay, and found the amount to which each employee named was entitled. He found that employees dismissed between January 1, 1954, and March 31, 1954, and who were not reinstated within 90 days, were entitled to dismissal pay, but failed to name these employees or make any award of dismissal pay to them.