LABOR DISPUTE, Flight personnel, Ground personnel, Same establishment
CITE AS: McAnallen v ESCMcAnallen v ESC, 26 Mich App 621 (1970).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Carole J. McAnallen, et al
Employer: United Air Lines
Docket No: B67 309 35243
COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: Flight personnel who work in an airplane, are not employed in the same establishment as the ground personnel of an airline.
FACTS: The claimants worked as cabin attendants and pilots. "They were laid off for a month in July-August, 1966, because of a nationwide strike of the ground personnel of the airline."
DECISION: The claimants are not disqualified for benefits because of a labor dispute.
RATIONALE: "In Northwest Airlines, Inc. v Employment Security Commission (1966), 378 Mich 199, the claimants were Michigan-based
ground service employees of Northwest Airlines who were laid off from work as a result of a strike by flight engineers who were domiciled in Minneapolis and Seattle but who were attached to aircraft which flew from place to place throughout the airline system, including Michigan. The issue there, as here, was whether the claimants' unemployment was the result of a strike 'in the establishment' where they were employed. It was held that the non-striking ground personnel were not employed in the establishment of the striking personnel."
"The flight personnel, who work in the airplane as it flies from one place to another, constitute a work force separate and apart, physically and functionally from the ground personnel at the airport. Focusing on the character of the 'worker's employment and the character of the place in which it was performed,' viewing the matter 'from the standpoint of the worker's employment' (Northwest, p 133), we conclude that the plaintiffs, who perform their services in an airplane, were not employed in the airport or the establishment where the striking ground personnel were employed."