Broadway-Hale Stores, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union

DUNIWAY, J.

Appeal from an order and judgment confirming and enforcing the award of an arbitrator under a collective bargaining agreement. It is claimed by appellant employer that the question involved is not arbitrable under the agreement, that the arbitrator exceeded his powers, that he did not make a mutual, final and definite award, and that the court had no jurisdiction to confirm the award. We are affirming the judgment.

The pertinent provisions of the agreement are these:

Section IV: 11 The amended agreement shall be in full force

[302]

and effect from May 1, 1958, to and including April 30, 1960, subject to written notice by either of the parties, ten days prior to May 1, 1959, or any ten day notice thereafter. Such opening shall be limited to the negotiating of an increase of five (5) cents per hour.”

Section 14: “. . . It shall be the duty of the Adjustment Board to consider all complaints and disputes arising under the terms of this Agreement...”

The mechanics of arbitration are also set out, and there is also a “no strike” clause.

On June 10, 1959, the union gave notice under section IY. Negotiations were held, but no agreement was reached. The union then requested arbitration; the employer refused. The union obtained an order, under Code of Civil Procedure sections 1280 and following for arbitration. The employer, claiming lack of jurdisdiction, did not appear at the arbitration, which was held May 18,1960.

1.

The question was arbitrable.

Since this matter was submitted, the Supreme Court had decided the case of

Posner

v.

Grunwald-Marx, Inc.,

56 Cal.2d 109 [14 Cal.Rptr. 297, 363 P.2d 313], That case repudiates the so-called “no dispute” or “Cutler-Hammer” doctrine, upon which appellant principally relies, and disapproves the California cases that appellant cites. (Pp. 183-184.) There is nothing that we can add to what is there said.