AMERISTEEL CORP. v. INT'L BHD. OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AM., AFL-CIO, 00-3366
Because an unconsenting successor cannot be bound by the substantive provisions of its predecessor's agreement, an employer who has expressly refused to be bound by a predecessor's collective bargaining agreement does not have to arbitrate grievances under that agreement.
- Argued 11/30/2000
- Decided 09/26/2001
- Published 09/26/2001
- Before: BECKER, Chief Judge, RENDELL, and MAGILL, Circuit Judges.
- United States Third Circuit
- For Appellant:
- Ira H. Weinstock (Argued), Joseph P. Milcoff, Ira H. Weinstock, P.C., Harrisburg, PA, Counsel for Appellant.
- For Appellees:
- John G. Creech (Argued), D. Randle Moody, II, Haynsworth, Baldwin, Johnson & Greaves, Greenville, SC, and Mark J. Manta, Esq. Klett, Rooney, Lieber & Schorling, West Trenton, NJ, Counsel for Appellee.