State Ex Rel. Girard v. Percich, 557 S.W.2d 25 (1977)

Citation: State Ex Rel. Girard v. Percich, 557 S.W.2d 25 (1977)
Parent Document: State Ex Rel. Girard v. Percich, 557 S.W.2d 25 (1977)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 1977-08-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1737420/state-ex-rel-girard-v-percich/ ↗

Full Text

1,443 chars

Petitioners admit that the practice of following was engaged in; that the executive board adopted this practice as the Union’s policy and that the executive board, under its cachet, encouraged participation in the practice by its members. It is their contention, however, that the policy served a legitimate labor dispute function in that it gave the Union a means to learn the identity of those persons who crossed their picket line to buy beer from the struck employers. In this connection they argue that following customers was a long standing policy of Local 133, as well as other local unions, and had been used in previous strikes where struck employers had sold their products directly from the docks. They maintain that the policy was employed to serve two valid purposes. First, it was to procure the names and license numbers of the customers for later publication in the Union newspaper “unfair list.” This list was used to alert other union members that the persons and businesses whose names appeared thereon had crossed a picket line and were to be boycotted because they were unfair to organized labor. Secondly, the Union maintained that it was used to discover and to expose those customers who engaged in the illegal practice of “bootlegging” beer. Union members testified that on occasion customers holding valid retail liquor licenses would purchase truck loads of beer from the wholesalers and then would deliver this *35

Other Sections in This Document (114)

Full Text