Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Peterson v Bechtel Corporation 5.06

Section 29(8)

LABOR DISPUTE, Building trades, Contractor association, Contractor/employer, Separate establishment.

CITE AS: Peterson v Bechtel Corporation, No. 70457 (Mich App December 19, 1984).

Appeal pending: No

Claimant: Reuben Peterson, et al

Employer: Bechtel Corporation

Docket No: B78 62256 72839

COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: "Bechtel was the 'establishment' in which plaintiffs were employed and in which the labor dispute occurred, plaintiffs are involved by definition 'directly involved' under Section 29(8)(a)(10)."

FACTS: Bechtel contracted with Cleveland Cliffs to engineer and construct an iron ore facility. As contractor/employer, Bechtel hired from various building trades and was a member of the Michigan Chapter of Associated General Contractors,(MAGC). A majority of craft union contracts expired with MAGC. Negotiations reached an impasse and picketing began by the carpenter union. Claimants honored the pickets, though not members of the carpenter union. Bechtel, deferred to by Cleveland Cliffs, closed the facility. Claimants argue that Bechtel was not the establishment in which claimants were employed, but either MAGC or Cleveland Cliffs.

DECISION: Claimants are disqualified under the labor dispute provisions of the Act.

RATIONALE: Bechtel, an active member of MAGC, was the employer/ establishment against which the strike activity was directed. Bechtel, not Cleveland Cliffs, made decision to close the facility and thereby continue the effects of the strike.


3, 14:NA

Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page