Document: 360 U.S. 601 79 S.Ct. 1351 3 L.Ed.2d 1460 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Petitioner,v.L. L. PRICE. No. 414. Argued March 31, 1959. Decided June 29, Mr. James A. Wilcox, Omaha, Neb., for petitioner. Samuel S. Lionel, Las Vegas, Nev., respondent. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This is a diversity common-law action brought by respondent, former employee petitioner railroad, in United States District Court Nevada to recover damages from railroad allegedly wrongfully discharging him violation collective bargaining agreement between it and Brotherhood Railroad Trainmen. The validity discharge was previously challenged upon same grounds before National Adjustment Board, First Division, proceeding on respondent's behalf under § (i) Railway Labor Act,1 seeking reinstatement with back pay. Board rendered an award favor question decision here whether respondent may pursue remedy his wrongful dismissal after having chosen statutory which resulted determination that justified. 2 employed as swing brakeman (an extra who not regularly assigned member train crew) bragaining contained two provisions involved dispute over discharge. One provision, Article 32(b), provided that: 'Swing brakemen will be tied up nor released at points where sleeping eating accommodations are available.' other 33(a), 'When trainman suspended alleged fault, no punishment fixed without thorough investigation, accused have choice present.' On July 12, 1949, called 'deadhead' Train 37 Nevada, Nipton, California, point he detrain await assignment another traveling Vegas. Arrived Nipton 10:30 p.m., dispatcher X 1622E, due arrive around 4 a.m., en route complained there were facilities available or told would go Vegas return getting something eat. refused release ordered wait arrival 1622E. disobeyed this instruction deadheaded left 11:10 p.m. morning 13. 16 received notice appear 10 a.m. 17 Assistant Superintendent investigation. At request investigation postponed 18, time requested further postponement until representative, Brotherhood's Local Chairman, could present. A again granted, 2:30 18th, but Chairman apparently still time. When failed hearing, proceeded absence. testimony witnesses taken stenographically transcribed; evidence behalf. 24 notified reaspondent discharged. 5 processed grievance through required management levels, when settlement reached, arrived joint submission Brotherhood, January 1951, filed ex parte Board's Division.2 Hearing waived parties considered papers them. 25, 1952, its 'Claim denied,' supporting findings.3 6 Some three years filing award, 6, 1955, instant suit. His complaint alleges cause predicated had been urged namely, (1) 'was dismissed cause' (2) 'thorough investigation' because 'afforded opportunity present held' reasonable prepare defense,' 'to present' participate own defense.' After answer, moved summary judgment affidavits file ground 'any judicially enforceable arising termination employment relationship * now barred adjudication such terms conditions said agreement, pursuant conformance Act *.' Court, opinion, granted motion entered appealed Appeals Ninth Circuit, assigning single appeal 'erred holding entitled (the railroad) Summary Judgment.' Appeals, one judge dissenting, reversed, 255 F.2d 633. Although held 'without jurisdiction entertain if represents merits,' id., page 666, court concluded while questions Price submitted determination,' 'the made merits' determined only manner conducted carrier none Price's rights regard abridged,' therefore action. Id., pages 666—667. We certiorari decide important raised case interpretation Act. 358 892, 155, 119. 7 do agree Appeals' based solely 33(a) violated followed investigation.' Rather we think also reflects discharged good cause. Thus Judge Healy, dissenting face customarily brief findings Board4 appears 'plain substance held, asserted Company 32, even true, serve justify employee's direct operating instructions abandonment post.' 667—668. Since set aside either sustained, unqualified denial claim necessarily implied, think, decided both adversely Even procedure constituted proper outright explicable 32(b) did disobeying dispatcher's remain Nipton. conclude issues against respondent,5 reach despite adverse Court.6 8 Congress has (m) Act7 'awards shall final binding dispute, except insofar they contain money award.' Respondent does argue 'money award' anything than directing payment money. Indeed, distort English language interpret term including refusal payment. Thus, plain (m), face, imports intended disposition should preclude subsequent losing party. Furthermore, specification normally excludes another.' Switchmen's Union v. Mediation 320 297, 301, 64 95, 97, 88 L.Ed. 61. our duty give effect congressional purpose compels us hold precluded unless over-all scheme established legislative history clearly indicate intention contrary meaning words imports. Our understanding history, however, reinforces what already makes clear, resort commonlaw Board.8 9 provide framework peaceful labor disputes carriers their employees 'insure public continuity efficiency interstate transportation service, protect injuries losses consequent any impairment interruption commerce failures managers settle peaceably controversies.' H.R.Rep. 328, 69th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 1. not, original 1926 Act, create make use agency compulsory parties; rather contemplated achieved 'machinery amicable adjustment agreed S.Rep. 606, 4. Congress, therefore, boards 'created group carriers, whole, employees.' 1926, 44 Stat. 578. These boards, settling termed minor industry, primarily grievances application agreements particular situations, see Trainmen Chicago River & I.R. Co., 353 30, 77 635, 622, thus voluntary agreement. recognized useful bringing about industrial peace decisions parties. creating must stipulate 'that dispute; abide (e) 579. But sanctions force establishing many railroads so limited participation ineffectual.9 Moreover, created composed equal numbers representatives deadlocks cases became commonplace. breaking provided, remained unsettled. As reported 1934 Eastman, Federal Coordinator Transportation: 'Another difficulty law Act), board established, that, although parties, can certainty decision.' Hearings Senate Committee Interstate Commerce 3266, 73d 2d 17. Strike threats frequent atmosphere mutual recriminations presented danger very strife statute designed avoid. Eastman House Rules Committee: '(G)rievances number roads past few accumulated extent men threaten strike secure appointment President fact finding into whole situation. That happened several occasions. these hundreds various situation finally intolerable Committee, 25; 14; 17; Elgin, J. E.R. Co. Burley, 325 711, 725—726, 65 1282, 1290 1291, 89 1886. 11 organizations particularly dissatisfied. They effective attained amendments establish participate, permit compel submit neutral person break occurring divided equally, and, finally, awards courts, favorable employees.10 views prevailed drastically changed 21, 1934, 48 1185.11 selected them, (a) (g). four divisions each different whose proceedings independent another, (h). Disputes growing out handled usual chief officers designated handle disputes, failing referred party appropriate division, (i). Upon failure division deadlock inability majority vote members, appoint referee sit thereof (l). Awards award; involving light (m). In petitioner, order, directed carrier, pay sum employee, (o). If notcom ply enforcement sought suit (p). 12 spokesman proposal crystal clear essential feature affected employees. willing remedies outside workable grievances. George Harrison, Clerks, stated: 'Grievances come them themselves. Railroads don't institute Grievances instituted officers' actions, take chances national believe, experience, best most efficient method controversies 33. '(W)e ready concede risk get (but) going hodgepodge arrangement law, suggested bill, then want right, right feel measure justice machinery suggest here.' 35. echoed thought: 'decisions act, I understand it, organizations, objecting provision. day members board, cannot reached representing sides man steps renders decision, accept Foreign H.R. 7650, 59. See 58—65. 13 interests served providing tribunal people experienced industry. employees' settlements those again. 14 Despite conclusion compelled noncomplying (p) affords defeated some relitigate Board,12 unfairness results construed deny maintain emphasis consideration avoiding expressed Comm., 337 426, 69 1410, 93 1451, Commission shipper reparations reviewable federal pointing railroad. rested 28 U.S.C. (1946 ed.) 41(28)* 'The district courts enjoin, aside, annul, suspend part order Commission.' (Italics supplied.) contrast, commands controversy denied pay, which, said, (o) (p), procedures similar 49 16(1) (2), U.S.C.A. 16(1, 2), orders Commission, concerned counterpart disparity judicial review orders, unfair all, explicitly say ought removed. 15 Plainly revised arise daily, principally matters administration agreements. grist relations realistically squared contention foreclose litigation disposed authorized Washington Terminal Boswell, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 124 235, affirmed equally 319 732, 63 1430, 87 1694, claimed result process law,see Ellerd Southern Pacific R. Cir., 241 541; Barnett Pennsylvania-Reading Seashore Lines, 245 579, 582. So far appears, all Appeals13 Courts14 dealt problem here. To litigate sustain planned function render advisory opinions, Act's entire regarded 'as wholly conciliatory character, element legal effectiveness, consequence entirely free ignore (a contention) inconsistent terms, purposes history.' Elgin 720—721, 1288. precludes reversed remanded direction affirm 18 It ordered. 19 Judgment 20 DOUGLAS, whom CHIEF JUSTICE BLACK concur, dissenting. 21 basic reserved 719, 720, 1287, denies comes within exception provides 22 pointed dissent (325 760—761, 1306—1307) provision finality close origin reparation 23 'Since Acts came Congressional Committees finds, naturally enough, Commission. Compare 3, amended Hepburn 34 584, 590, 16(1), 2). fails comply true non-compliance complainant sue enforcement; Commission's become prima facie facts stated. bar door redress courts. Baltimore Ohio Brady, 288 448, 53 441, 888; I.C.C. States, 289 385, 388, 607, 609, 1273; Warehouse Pennsylvania 297 500, 507, 56 546, 548, 80 827.' Burley described changed. Subsequently, decided; earlier precedents cited case, claims shippers 'negative order' doctrine, abandoned Rochester Tel. Corp. 307 125, 59 754, 83 1147, greatly influenced prior decisions. 25 follow discarded doctrine there; find place An is, much cents. descriptive nature claim, setting class apart suits involve, example, declaration seniority rights. 26 Tolerance more rule administrative finality.1 Shields Utah Idaho Cent. 305 177, 183, 160, 163, 111; Stark Wickard, 321 288, 309—310, 559, 570—571, 733; Harmon Brucker, 355 581—582, 78 433, 434—435, 503; Leedom Kyne, 184, 190, 180, 185, 210. weight Administrative Procedure 60 243, 1009, side review, being sanctioned precluded. 27 argues grossly construe indeed asserting loses, employer obtain wins. difficult me believe approved lopsided, preferential system. No rhyme reason apparent discrimination. attempt throughout equalize advantages contending prefer long dominant. 6—7, 240—241. denying intendment Berryman Pullman D.C., F.Supp. 542. narrow reading, keeping harmony read awards' matter kind. Section covers 'does comply.' 'shall therein stated.' properly maintainable otherwise jurisdiction. election express final. specifies obtained,the re preserved whatever available. separate actions maintained employee. Moore Illinois Central 312 630, 61 85 1089; Slocum Delaware, W.R. 339 239, 244, 70 577, 94 795; Transcontinental Western Air Koppal, 345 653, 661, 73 906, 910, 97 1325. stated 'A differs power reinstate pay; relief Board. include items well. Here lost earnings future earnings, rights, retirement hospitalization Whether governs contract grant important. recovery greater, attorney fees.2 triable jury lost, wiped out, abolished merely loses pursues lesser restrictive equality assertion assumption duties chance proceeds first there, court. 29 my view Court's reading raises constiutional magnitude. For prevails, latter trial complying unjustifiable discrimination Due Process Clause Fifth Amendment. practice country lawsuit prevail, one, case. Day, 554, 1326 (dissent.) 30 remand trial. 191, 45 153 (i), 153, subd. 1(i), provides: concerning rates rules, working conditions, pending unadjusted officer disputes; but, manner, petition full statement data bearing disute s.' conceded bring 1886; rehearing, 327 66 721, 90 928. pertinent excerpts following: 'If operations relied obey orders. Claimant found wilfully insubordination merited discipline. seeks complete vindication rules substantial compliance rule. 'Basically, hearing claimant '* heard disciplined personal cn w aive action, inaction, act faith. position strengthened personally appeared stages preserve record story hand. All transcript credit, leaves feeling things complains way.' Garrison, Board: Unique Agency, 46 Yale L.J. 567, describes Division follows: 'It noted purely jurisdictional recitals, consist sentence ('The indicates movements constitute switching I—R') constitutes nub decision. Rarely central two. lay reader quoted above meaningless. intelligle printed form preceded submission, (likewise extracted submission), management's derived similarly submission. From rival statements easy determine about, laconic real basis reached.' announced November 26, 1958, declared reflected justified refer substantiation instead 1089, chose relitigation deprive constitutional 1191—1192, sub. section writing. copy furnished respective controversy, award. arises dispute.' import requires However, simply might pursued challenge dismissal. obtained issue 15. (1926) near fool possibly be. mean this—that shall, so. Well, you pretty nearly how agree?' 137. Provision thought unnecessary since usually challenging sustained affirmative unfavorable injunctive relief. 635; pp. discussion enacted thereto, 1282; 1694. 1192, 1(p), limit forth briefly causes relief, premises. Such proceed respects civil suits, stated, liable costs stage proceedings, accrue appeal, paid appropriation expenses States. prevail allowed attorney's fee, taxed collected empowered, governing enter judgment, writ mandamus otherwise, enforce Board.' New 1336. 579; Bower Eastern Airlines, Inc., 214 623; Michel Louisville N.R. 188 224; Reynolds Denver R.G.W.R. 174 673; 10, Weaver D.C.S.D.N.Y., 141 214, per curiam, 240 350; Byers Atchison, T. S.F.R. D.C.S.D.Cal., 129 109; Greenwood 105; Farris Alaska D.C.W.D.Wash., 113 907; Parker Illionis D.C.N.D.Ill., 108 186; Futhey 96 864; Kelly Nashville, C. St. L.R. D.C.E.D.Tenn., 737; Ramsey Chesapeake O.R. D.C.N.D.Ohio, 740; D.C.W.D.Mo., Cases like 61, General Missouri-Kansas-Texas 323, 146, 76, exception, mediation, adjudication—mediation antithesis justiciability.' U.S., 337, 152. See, e.g., Wis.Stat.Ann., 103.39(3); Vernon's Ann.Tex.Civ.Stat., Art. 2226. Cf. Fair Standards 16(b), 216(b), 216(b).

Category: 7