1685 Fisher et al. v. International President

Although its terms were presented to the membership as a grievance settlement, the agreement negotiated for the company’s active employees was simply a plant closing agreement. The membership’s vote to accept this agreement was largely a formality. This was not a grievance arising out of the employer’s contractual obligations to appellants, but an arrangement negotiated by the parties to assist those members who became unemployed as a result of the company’s decision to close their plant. Appellants did not need a bridge to support them until they could find other employment; they had already found other employment. Under the circumstances, it was not irrational for the union to restrict the distribution of limited settlement dollars to active employees.