In re California Music Theatre Inc. and American Federation of Musicians Local 47

94 Lab. Arb. (BNA) 92 (1989)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re California Music Theatre Inc. and American Federation of Musicians Local 47

Labor Arbitration
94 Lab. Arb. (BNA) 92 (1989)

  • Written by Liz Nakamura, JD

Facts

California Music Theatre, Inc. (CMT) (defendant), a nonprofit theater company, entered into a collective-bargaining agreement with the American Federation of Musicians Local 47 (AFM) (plaintiff) to employ musicians for CMT’s productions. Because CMT primarily produced limited-run, limited-budget musicals based out of the local Pasadena Civic Auditorium (PCA), AFM agreed to certain accommodations because CMT was not a first-class producer. There was no strict definition for a first-class producer; however, community-level producers were never considered first class. Specifically, AFM allowed CMT to hire 18 musicians per production, instead of the 21 typically required for performances at the PCA, and AFM allowed CMT to pay those musicians at a lower rate. The agreement did not contemplate the possibility that CMT might put on a first-class production in the future, but it did state that AMT’s normal rules and regulations, including employment and wage regulations, applied to the extent those normal rules were not in conflict with the terms of the agreement. In 1988, CMT informed AFM that it planned to put on a first-class production of Strike Up the Band at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion (DCP), a large, premier venue in Los Angeles. The planned production would involve twice as many performances and more than double the budget of CMT’s usual productions. CMT did not dispute that it needed to pay musicians the full, typical rate required by the AFM for productions at the DCP. However, CMT requested a waiver of the AFM’s rule that a minimum of 31 musicians needed to be hired for productions at the DCP; CMT wanted to hire only 22. AFM refused the waiver. Regardless, CMT hired only 22 musicians for its performances at DCP. AFM filed a grievance, which was heard before a labor arbitrator.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Weiss, Arbitrator)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership