In Nolde Brothers, Inc. v. Local No. 358, Bakery & Confectionery Workers Union,' the Supreme Court held that a labor-management grievance dispute which arose after the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement might, under certain circumstances, be compulsorily arbitrable even though no successor agreement providing for arbitration had been entered into by the parties.2 In so holding, however, the Supreme Court was imprecise in articulating the factors underlying its determination,3 leaving to the lower courts and the National Labor Relations Board (Board) the considerable task of adopting the broadly phrased Nolde rationale-a presumption of continuing arbitrability- to differing situations where the issue of post-contractual arbitrability might be crucial. In the years since Nolde was decided, a body of inconsistent case law has emerged, sending confusing signals to employers and unions with respect to their mutual obligations to arbitrate grievances upon the termination of a labor contract.
New York Law School Law Review, Vol. 28, Issue 2 (1983), pp. 257-294