Section 42 Stoppage of Work

• Library: Employer-Employee Law 2008

Even though § 288.040.6, RSMo Supp. 2007, cited in §4.38 above, contains a definition of “stoppage of work,” the word “substantial” in that definition is often the bone of contention between the parties. The existence of a “stoppage of work” and not the existence of a “strike” or “lockout” is often determinative of entitlement to benefits. The following cases addressed the issue of “stoppage of work”:

• Chemtech Indus., Inc. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm’n, Div. of Employment Sec., 617 S.W.2d 121
  (Mo. App. E.D. 1981)

• Mead Prods., Div. of Mead Corp. v. Indus. Comm’n of Mo., 656 S.W.2d 805 (Mo. App. W.D. 1983)

• Laclede Gas Co. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Com. Of Mo., 657 S.W.2d 644 (Mo. App. E.D. 1983)

• Lou Stecher, Inc. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm’n, Div. of Employment Sec., 691 S.W.2d 936 (Mo. App. E.D. 1985)

• Paul Mueller Co. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm’n of Mo., 699 S.W.2d 88 (Mo. App. S.D. 1985)

In 1997, § 288.040.6(2) was amended to provide that the definition of a “stoppage of work” does not apply to a strike when the employees in the...