Document: 351 U.S. 105 76 S.Ct. 679 100 L.Ed. 975 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,v.The BABCOCK AND WILCOX COMPANY. Petitioner, v. SEAMPRUFE, Inc. RANCO, BOARD. Nos. 250, 251, 422. Argued Jan. 25 and 26, 1956. Decided April 30, Mr.Dominick L. Manoli, Washington, D.C., for N.L.R.B. Mr. O. B. Fisher, Paris, Tex., respondent Babcock & Wilcox Co. Karl H. Mueller, Fort Worth, Seamprufe, Eugene Schwartz, Cleveland, Ohio, petitioner Ranco, Justice REED delivered the opinion of Court. 1 In each these cases employer refused to permit distribution union literature by nonemployee organizers on company-owned parking lots. The National Labor Relations Board, in separate unrelated proceedings, found case that it was unreasonably difficult organizer reach employees off company property held that, refusing unions access lots, employers had impeded their employees' right self-organization violation § 8(a)(1) Act, 29 U.S.C.A. 158(a)(1). Co., 109 485, 494; Inc., id., 998, 1007, 24, 32. 2 plant involved No. Board is a engaged manufacture tubular products such as boilers accessories, located 100-acre tract about one mile from community 21,000 people. Approximately 40% 500 live town remainder within 30-mile radius. More than 90% them drive work private automobiles park lot adjoins fenced area. reached only driveway yards long which entirely excepting public right-of-way extends 31 feet metal highway plant's property. Thus, place immediate vicinity area at leaflets can be effectively distributed where this crosses right-of-way. Because traffic conditions practically impossible distribute safely motors they enter or leave lot. noted company's policy not discriminated against labor organizations other means communication, mail telephones, well homes workers, were open union.1 justified its refusal allow ground maintained consistent all kinds pamphleteering would litter 3 walkway gatehouse, punched work, 'safe practicable' places literature. viewed so much more effective communication information guilty an unfair practice limited organizers. It therefore ordered rescind no-distibution order walkway, subject reasonable nondiscriminating regulations 'in interest efficiency discipline, but deny representatives purpose effecting distribution.' N.L.R.B., 486. 4 petitioned Court Appeals Fifth Circuit enforcement. That court enforcement statute did authorize impose servitude employer's no employee involved. 5 Cir., 222 F.2d 316. circumstances 422, are materially different, except Seamprufe involves employing approximately 200 persons Ranco appears better opportunity pass out likewise orders substantially similar form case. Enforcement sought Courts Appeals. Tenth 858, 861, justify his presence 'as bears cogent relationship exercise guaranteed self organization.' These 'solicitors strangers self-organization, absent showing nonaccessibility amounting handicap self-organization.' Id., page 861. Sixth 422 granted 543. per curiam depended upon decision Monarch Tool 6 210 183, involved; Lake Superior Lumber Corp., 167 147, isolated lumber camp case; our Republic Aviation Corp. 324 793, 65 982, 89 1372. apparently considered, case, supra, 186, attitude 'unreasonable impediment freedom essential rights conflicting decisions recurring phase we certiorari. 350 818, 894, 78, 156. violated 61 Stat. 140, making interfere with 7 Act. pertinent language two sections below.2 holdings placed Board's determination LeTourneau Company Georgia, 54 1253. balanced interests receive fellow during nonworking time, control use former case.3 Recognizing could restrict activities when necessary maintain discipline production, said: 'Upon above considerations, convinced, find, respondent, applying 'no-distributing' rule lots has unreasonable self-organization,' 1262. This affirmed Board. 801 et seq., 987, same been earlier fully stated Peyton Packing 49 828, 843—844. applied reasoning without distinction situations made, here, nonemployees. Carolina Mills, 92 1141, 1149, 1168—1169.4 fact ruled Appeal 150, 10 860. Cf. American Furnace 158 376, 380. 8 present set facts support conclusions necessity allowing essence representatives, if barred, have personal contacts streets home, letters advertised meetings get touch employees. force position respect normal recognized others. See Corporation 799, note 3, 986, 1372; 150. We recognize, too, responsibility "applying Act's general prohibitory light infinite combinations events might charged violative terms." Stowe Spinning 336 226, 231, 69 541, slow overturn administrative decision. 9 judgment, however, may validly post efforts through available channels will enable message notice does discriminate distribution. compelled even under permit. problem always closed doors organization Organization workers authority, Government, preserves rights. Accommodation between must obtained little destruction maintenance other. affirmatively organization; insist aid organization. But inaccessibility makes ineffective attempts nonemployees communicate usual channels, exclude required yield extent needed organize. 11 proper adjustments rests Its rulings, findings supported substantial evidence record whole,5 should sustained courts unless rest erroneous legal foundations. Here failed make rules law applicable those nonemployees.6 12 substance. No restriction discuss among themselves, demonstrate production discipline. 803, 988, obligation owed Their governed different consideration. depends some measure ability learn advantages self- Consequently, location living quarters beyond them, approach shown records. 13 plants close small well-settled communities large percentage live. methods imparting available. See, e.g., 1, supra. various instruments publicity hand. Though scattered reach. Act requires refrain interference, discrimination, restrant coercion own require facilities readily 14 affirmed. 15 Affirmed. 16 17 18 reversed. 19 Reversed. 20 HARLAN took part consideration cases. 'Other employees: addition distributing employees, above, period concern herein Union communicated over Respondent occasions sending mails. many Respondent's talking driving there, telephone. All soliciting adherence membership Union. 492—493. 'Sec. 7. Employees shall form, join, assist organizations, bargain collectively choosing, engage concerted collective bargaining mutual protection * *. 8(a). employer— '(1) with, restrain, coerce section *.' U.S.C. §§ 157, 158(a) (1), 'As previously indicated, respondent's country heart 6,000 acres land owned subsidiary. Apart Highway (and perhaps intersecting road), subsidiary adjacent plant. This, itself, seriously limits possibilities communicating bulk limitation not, too restrictive gate opened directly onto highway, then stand outside premises entered left back Over 60 cent after passing gate, busses parked space presumably speed homeward, ever setting foot highway. Distribution rendered virtually circumstances, inescapable conclusion consequently impeded. answer suggest disseminating foreclosed. Moreover, wide absence list names addresses, direct contact majority away extremely difficult.' 1260 1261. An element discrimination existed Mills 1142, 230, 233, 543, 544, 93 638, relied opinion. also Caldwell Furniture 97 1501, 1502, 1509; Machine 102 1242, 1248, enforced, 183. For collection cases, see 1006, Note, Yale L.J. 423. Universal Camera 340 474, 491, 71 456, 466, 95 456. examiner's report, approved 'To differentiate behalf solicitors differentiation substance clear defiance rationale given permitting solicitation. based belief enunciated Supreme equally solicitation done employees.' 493, 1006.

Category: 6