Document: 383 U.S. 696 86 S.Ct. 1107 16 L.Ed.2d 192 INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW), AFL-CIO, Petitioner,v.HOOSIER CARDINAL CORPORATION. No. 387. Argued Jan. 27, 1966. Decided March 24, Stephen I. Schlossberg, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Harry P. Dees, Evansville, Ind., respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Section 301 Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, confers jurisdiction upon federal district courts over suits collective bargaining contracts.1 Nowhere in however, is there a provision any time limitation bringing an action under § 301. The questions presented by this case arise because absence such provision. 2 petitioner union and respondent company were parties to contract within purview contained section governing vacations. One clause dealt with payment accumulated vacation pay, providing: 'Employees who qualified pervious year whose employment terminated reason before taken will be paid that at termination.' On June 1, 1957, prior expiration contract, employees covered agreement, but it did not pay them pay. Since date, two lawsuits have been brought recover amounts allegedly due. first was class early 1958, against Indiana court, court ruled impermissible law. In attempt remedy pleading defect, former assigned their claims representative then filed amended complaint, form action, too, held improper Thereafter, further complaints, sought reform reinstitute once again trial complaint insufficient as matter state dismissed suit 1960, judgment dismissal affirmed on appeal. Johnson v. Hoosier Cardinal Corp., 134 Ind.App. 477, 189 N.E.2d 592. 3 Almost four years after lawsuit almost seven had left company, present United States District Court Southern Indiana. company's motion, concluding barred six-year statute limitations. regarded based partly written agreement oral each employee made, would apply hybrid its contracts writing. Ind.Stat.Ann. 2—601 (1965 Supp.). 235 F.Supp. 183. Appeals Seventh Circuit affirmed, 346 P.2d 242, we granted certiorari, 382 808, 87, 15 58. 4 We note outset properly There no merit contention may sue wages or claimed members pursuant terms contract. Such among those '(s)uits violation between employer labor organization' designed permit. This conclusion unimpaired fact worker's claim also depend existence his individual employment. See J. Case Co. National Board, 321 332, 335—336, 64 576, 88 L.Ed. 762. Smith Evening News Assn., 371 195, 83 267, 9 246, rejected view, carying reasons majority Court, Association Westinghouse Salaried Employees 348 437, 75 488, 99 510, 'that give * enforce rights characterized arising 'from separate hiring employee." U.S., 198, 269. Alghough worker, every recognize union's standing vindicate obtained. recognition fully consistent language 301(b): 'Any organization behalf whom represents States.' 61 Stat. 156, 29 U.S.C. 185(b) (1964 ed.).2 And indeed, implements more than established doctrine role process does end making contract.3 5 301, question timeliness squarely presented. It clearly question, applicable law 'federal law, which must fashion from policy our national laws.' Textile Workers Union America Lincoln Mills, 353 448, 456, 77 912, 918, 972. Relying statement coordinate principle 'incompatible doctrines local way principles law,' Local 174 Teamsters, Chauffeurs, etc. Lucas Flour Co., 369 95, 102, 82 571, 7 593, contends cannot limitations enacted State. are urged instead devise uniform close statutory gap Congress. But teaching cases require so bald judicial innovation. Mills instructs that, fashioning 'range inventiveness determined nature problem.' 457, 918. do problems vital implementation they command high degree courts. problem here, nature. 6 true if provisions govern suits, these lack standard timeliness. subject 'peculiarly one calls law.' supra, 103, 576. Our defined need uniformity, largely inapplicable here: 'The possibility might different meanings (two systems law) inevitably exert disruptive influence both negotiation administration agreements. Because neither party could certain obtained conceded, negotiating made immeasurably difficult necessity trying formulate contain same meaning someday invoked enforcing Once bargain conflicting substantive interpretation competing legal tend stimulate prolong disputes interpretation. Indeed, possibly concepts substantially impede parties' willingness agree providing final arbitral resolution disputes. 8 '* ordering adjusting interests through free voluntary keystone scheme promote industrial peace. State frustrates effort Congress smooth functioning thus strikes very core policy.' 103—104, 577. then, greatest where threaten consensual processes chiefly formation private settlement it. For most part, statutes come into play only when already broken down. Lack uniformity area therefore unlikely frustrate important achievement significant goal policy. Thus, although well constitute desirable addition, justification drastic sort legislation us.4 203, S.Ct., 271 (Black, J., dissenting). 10 That provide argument judicially creating one, unless ignore context legislative omission. clear gave attention 1947; six months' unfair practice proceedings, 146, 160(b) ed.), appreciable controversy.5 context, background relationship provisions, fairly inferred without limitation, expectation invent one. As 1830, causes has specifically provided otherwise. McCluny Silliman, Pet. 270, 277, 676. 1895, re-examined another remained firm. Campbell City Haverhill, 155 610, 217, 39 280. time, repeatedly supplied periods silent question.6 E.g., McClaine Rankin, 197 154, 25 410, 49 702; Cope Anderson, 331 461, 67 1340, 91 1602 (National Bank Act); Chattanooga Foundry & Pipe Works Atlanta, 203 390, 27 65, 51 241 (Sherman O'Sullivan Felix, 233 318, 34 596, 58 980 (Civil Rights Act 1870); Englander Motors, Inc. Ford Motor 293 F.2d 802 (C.A.6th Cir.) (Clayton see Holmberg Armbrecht, 327 392, 66 582, 90 743. (Federal Farm Loan Act). Yet disagreed silence, spoken overturn enacting period 69 283, 15b ed.) 35 286 (Patent Herget Central 324 4, 65 505, 89 656. Against background, take omission license suits. 11 Accordingly, since governs, hold suit, determined, reference appropriate limitations.7 leaves subsidiary decided. Which Indiana's governs?8 Does tolling preserve action? 12 argues statutes, precludes Reference instead, urged, 20-year contracts. 2—602 rests view exclusively bottomed agreement. characterization purpose selecting ultimately Alabama supra; supra. reject impose unreasonable otherwise inconsistent policy, Cf. Reconstruction Finance Corp. Beaver County, 328 204, 210, 992, 1172; De Sylva Ballentine, 351 570, 580—582, 76 974, 979—980, 100 1415. 13 Applying principle, requires purposes jurisdiction, solely contracts, frequently oral, employee. News, follow, account characterizing specific indicates, consideration entirely acceptable. seeks damages alleged breach Proof measure damages, proof duration aggrieved employees. Hence, 14 Moreover, imposes lead conflict extent manifest supports acceptance adopted here. 160(b), suggests relatively rapid disposition writing generally shorter wholly agreements, applicability actions comports goal. may, course, can many other benefits concern involved inhibit identifiable precluding application provisions.9 accept Court's action. Bernhardt Polygraphic 350 204—205, 273, 276, 199; Steele General 329 433, 438, 439, 442, 402. until cause accrued, somehow tolled particularized circumstances case.10 some saves life raised event, find merit. Burnett New York R. 380 424, 85 1050, 941, timely Federal Employers' Liability even though venue improper, served toll Act. primary underprinning Burnett, lacking noted case, necessary implement bar expressed FELA 434, 1058. establishes unlike plaintiff longer bring here full three action.11 Under circumstances, difficulty expired 1963, arose. 17 Affirmed. 18 WHITE, DOUGLAS BRENNAN join, dissenting. 19 Certain undisputed case. law; and, express rule. By adopting several States, creates 50 limitations1 rather rule relevant statutes. 20 justifies decision part reliance decided Rules Decisions 28 1652 interpreted 'the silence mean adopt limitation.' 395, 584, 743; see, e.g., 397, 66, 241; 280; establish read automatically putting imprimatur Rather, applied supplements fulfills ultimate what requires. Board County Comm'rs Jackson, Kan. 308 343, 350—352, 60 285, 289, 84 313; 394—395, 583, 463, 502, 510 (Reed, concurring). 21 More specifically, quite respect congressional extends just encompasses entirety principles. Rather inferring govern, Alabama, 972, 'fashion laws' general Id., Although recognized 'state compatible resorted order best effectuate policy,' id., intimate furthered adoption rules. To contrary, subsequent decisions '(c) omprehensiveness inherent formulated mandate Mills' '(m)ore important, 301(a) 'is peculiarly law." 593. is, therefore, sound basis saying intended laws diverse simply reluctance supply omitted. expected develop task process. 22 reasons, too 'bald innovation.' Ante, p. 701. Cases defining said limited matters concerning possible varying "would agreements." pp. 701-702. Since, according majority, effect,2 concludes 'might us.' 702-703. 23 undoubtedly correct stating desirable. Suppose, example, dispute Detroit multi-state unit truckdrivers discharged Suppose hired Chicago while others St. Louis, Cleveland, Terre Haute Illinois, Michigan, Iowa (in whatever combinations preferred). finally, Indiana, court. Simple justice dictates situation right assert should equally available. Clearly sense referring years. Nor why operating bothered stale employers States. 24 unnecessary complexities opportunities vexatious litigation, reflected opinion. Thus notes involving contacts, example given above, hearing required decide whether federal, forum State's, rules select If holds additional continue own Whatever rule, selected, remain applying control. choose statutes; choice today's decision, governed State's (or court's Delphic be), 'unless 706. statute, having finally 'unusually short long.'3 707 n. 9. indicated merely illustrative complex approach reasonable tested policy; fertile imagination counsel conceive intricacies. desirability single, uniform, avoid litigation-creating course passing refers, overruled particular areas past refusals comes down proposition involve exercise I fathoming. Courts always reluctant 'create' limitations, commonlaw prescription judgments presumed lapse years, Gaines Miller, 111 399, 426, 427, 466; McElmoyle Use Bailey Cohen, 312, 327, 177, being example. equity laches, fashioned—the 50. undertaken blessing Congress, seems odd balk establishing single period, drawn sources available it, including undertake canvass here,4 think so. dissent. use term 'collective contracts' convenience only, intend suggest Retail Clerks Intern. Ass'n, etc., Lion Dry Goods, 17, 541, 503. provides: '(a) Suits representing industry affecting commerce organizations, parties, amount controversy regard citizenship parties. '(b) Any activities affect shall bound acts agents. sued entity money enforceable assets, member assets. proceedings organizations deemed (1) maintains principal office, (2) duly authorized officers agents engaged acting members. '(d) service summons, subpena, officer agent organization, capacity such, organization. '(e) section, determining person 'agent' make responsible acts, performed actually subsequently ratified controlling.' 156—157, 185 ed.). Rule 17(a) Civil Procedure; Dowd Box Courtney, 368 504, 519, 483; Steelworkers Enterprise Wheel Car 363 80 1358, 1424. See, Conley Gibson, 355 41, 46, 78 99, 80; Comment, U.Chi.L.Rev. 707, 716. assign presents barrier behalf. technical requirement widely elimination common-law procedural obstacles 451, 915. Meltzer, Supreme Jurisdiction Over Relations: II, 59 Col.L.Rev. 'substantive,' 917, 'substantive principles' 596. 'substantive' 'procedural.' Guaranty Trust N.Y. York, 326 1465, 2079; 2, 1054. rigidly classify 'primary' 'remedial.' useful, notice substantial effect definition effectuation Wellington, System, 26 542, 556—559. Compare, remarks Senator Wagner, 93 Cong.Rec. 3323, Murray, 4030, Smith, 4283. McAllister Magnolia Petroleum 357 221, 1201, 1272, 'where unseaworthiness combined Jones prescribed latter.' 224, 1204. departure tradition discussed text. rested peculiar configuration maritime remedies. A seaman suing negligence proceeding. Baltimore S.S. Phillips, 274 316, 47 600, 71 1069. occasion consider applied. 227, 1250 (Brennan, essentially caused employer's obligation embodied closely resembles cognizable common Whether call timeliness, decide, indicate whatsoever question. Moviecolor Limited Eastman Kodak 288 (C.A.2d Cir.); Moore Practice 3.07(1)—(3), 740—764 (2d ed. 1965); Hill, Procedural Law Nondiversity Litigation, Harv.L.Rev. 111—114. record indicates all operative events occurred. Neither suggested relevant. accord Klaxon Stentor Mfg. 313 487, 1020, 1477; operation Richards 585, 492; 1415; Vanston Bondholders Protective Committee Green, 237, 162; McKenzie Irving 323 365, 405, 305; D'Oench, Duhme Deposit Ins. 315 447, 62 676, 956. discussion Hart Wechsler, System et seq. Other reasonably described unusually long period. N.M.Stat. 59—3—4 (1953) (an 'must commenced sixth (60) days date discharge *'). 615, 219, Caldwell Dock Shipbuilding 161 (C.A.5th Mishkin, Variousness 'Federal Law': Competence Discretion Choice Decision, 105 U.Pa.L.Rev. 797, 805—806. 'accrued' employees' jobs. Rawlings Ray, 312 96, 473, 605; 1602; 80, 83, A.L.R.2d 252 Cir.). saving Ind.Ann.Stat. 2—608 (1946 Repl. Vol.), never contended preserves suit. adopts (and thereby least Territory. multitude type suggests, 'exclusively contract,' ante, 706, 20-year, six-year, governed. However, impact instances—for limit vary enforceability contractual periods, particularly asserted agreed unreasonable, Williston Contracts 183, 711, (Jaeger 3d 1957); Note, 63 1177, 1181—1182 (1950). assumed test advanced fashioned determine validity, as, arose, 605, running fraudulent concealment, Cir. 1961). Unfortunately provides enlightenment look unreasonable. Perhaps extremis kind innovation now rejects. mooted

Category: 6