National Labor Relations Board, Petitioner, v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 825, Iuoe, Afl-cio, Respondent, 420 F.2d 961 (3d Cir. 1970)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - 420 F.2d 961 (3d Cir. 1970) Argued January 6, 1970
Decided January 28, 1970

Corinna Lothar Metcalf, N. L. R. B., Washington, D. C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Atty., N. L. R. B., on the brief), for petitioner.

Earl S. Aronson, Newark, N. J. (Thomas E. Durkin, Jr., Newark, N. J., on the brief), for respondent.

Before BIGGS, ALDISERT and STAHL, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.


The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of an order against International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 825, AFL-CIO1  because the Board has found that the Union violated Section 8(b) (1) (A) of the National Labor Relations Act2  by expelling Domenic Tarantino from membership because he had filed an unfair labor practice charge against the Union without first exhausting his internal Union remedies. The Union also argues that the expulsion was merely the internal discipline of a Union member, not in the public domain and hence outside the jurisdiction of the Board.

We find no basis for the Union's contentions in the law. The Board's conclusions on these two points are correct. See NLRB v. Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, AFL-CIO, 391 U.S. 418, 88 S. Ct. 1717, 20 L. Ed. 2d 706 (1968). The Union seeks to distinguish the cited decision by asserting that the charge which led to Tarantino's expulsion was filed in bad faith and amounts to deliberate abuse of the Board's processes.3  The Board, however, found to the contrary and there is substantial evidence to support its finding.

The order of the Board will be enforced.

 1

The Board's decision and order, dated November 25, 1968, are reported at 173 N.L.R.B. 145

 2

29 U.S.C. § 158(b) (1) (A)

 3

Cf. Philadelphia Moving Picture Machine Operators' Union, etc. v. NLRB, 382 F.2d 598, 601, n. 1 (3 Cir. 1968)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.