Landers v. National Railroad Passengers Corporation et al. (485 U.S. 652)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 27, 1988 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 485 U.S. 652 · 108 S. Ct. 1440
- Decided
- April 27, 1988
- Term
- October Term 1987
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice White
- Issue area
- Unions
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court. This case presents the question whether a railroad engineer is entitled under the Railway Labor Act, 44 Stat. (part 2) 577, as amended, 45 U. S. C. § 151 et seq., to be represented at company-level grievance or disciplinary proceedings by a union other than his collective-bargaining representative. I Petitioner is employed as a passenger engineer by respondent National. Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak). Amtrak engineers are represented for purposes of collective bargaining by respondent Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE). Petitioner does not belong to the BLE. Instead, he is a member and officer of the rival United Transportation Union (UTU), which represents certain other crafts of Amtrak employees. In February 1984, petitioner was charged with a violation of company work rules. An internal disciplinary hearing was convened pursuant to the BLE-Amtrak collective-bargaining agreement. Petitioner’s request that the UTU be allowed to represent him at the disciplinary hearing was denied on the ground that the collective-bargaining agreement provided that only the BLE could represent engineers at company-level hearings. Petitioner represented himself at the hearing. He received a 30-day suspension, which he has now served. He did not appeal his suspension to the National Railroad Adjustment Board. Petitioner then…
Excerpt of a 10,969-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.