Document: 49 L.Ed.2d 1022 96 S.Ct. 3141 428 U.S. 397 BUFFALO FORGE CO., Petitioner,v.UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, et al. No. 75-339. Argued March 24, 1976. Decided July 6, Syllabus After petitioner employer's "office clerical-technical" (O&T) employees went on strike and picketed petitioner's plants during negotiations for a collective-bargaining contract, production maintenance (P&M) employees, who are represented by respondent unions, honored the O&T picket lines stopped work in support of sister unions representing employees. Petitioner then filed suit against respondents under § 301(a) Labor Management Relations Act, claiming that P&M employees' stoppage violated no-strike clause contracts between respondents, question whether such was arbitrable grievance arbitration provisions settling disputes over interpretation application each contract. sought damages, injunctive relief, an order directing to arbitrate question. The District Court, concluding result engaging sympathy striking held it prohibited from issuing injunction 4 Norris-LaGuardia Act because not "arbitrable grievance" hence within "narrow" exception established Boys Markets v. Retail Clerks Union, 398 235, 90 1583, 26 199. Court Appeals affirmed. Held: empowered enjoin pending arbitrator's decision as forbidden clause. Pp. 404-413. (a) any dispute even remotely subject but negotiating with neither purpose nor effect denying or evading obligation depriving its bargain. Markets, supra, distinguished. 409. (b) Nor authorized solely alleged clause, since, although 301 may be brought strikes breach contracts, this does mean federal courts contract violations despite Act. P. (c) While issue arbitrable, follow only also decision, since if could so court exhaustion applicable procedures, thus cutting deeply into Act's policy making potential participants wide range many just enforcing promises arbitrate, preliminarily dealing factual interpretative issues subjects arbitrator. 409-412. 517 F.2d 1207, Jeremy V. Cohen petitioner. George H. Cohen, Bredhoff, Cushman, Gottesman & Washington, D.C., respondents. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 is express contained which union party. 2 * Buffalo Forge Co. (employer) operates three separate plant office facilities Buffalo, N.Y., area. For some years at locations have been United Steelworkers America, Local Unions 1874 3732 (hereafter sometimes collectively Union). party two agreements locals employer. contain identical clauses,1 well latter provide: 3 "26. Should differences arise employee covered Agreement meaning Agreement, should trouble kind plant, there shall no suspension account differences, earnest effort made settle immediately (under six-step procedure provided sections 27 through 32)."2 Shortly before arose, other parties litigation were certified represent same locations. On November 16, 1974, after several months looking toward their first agreement, struck all 18, one refused cross line day. Two days later, employer learned planned stop next morning. In telegrams stated position would violate offered had led strike.3 day, Union's direction, plants. They did return until December regular working day denied prayer preliminary injunction. 5 complaint 1947,4 26, claimed violation Contending alternative caused specific incident involving truck drivers' refusal supervisor's instructions line, itself requested temporary restraining strike, compelling submit "underlying dispute" contractual procedures. clause.5 It "on day's notice,"6 opposed relief. 6 finding concluded engaged action Act7 199 (1970). 386 F.Supp. 405 (WDNY 1974). 7 appeal denial injunction, 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(1), stipulated Court's findings fact correct, Union directed stoppage, bona fide, primary, legal, though ended, might "be resumed time near future direction International otherwise."8 8 enjoining "over e has agreed arbitrate," permitted 1210 (CA2 1975). Because Courts divided enjoined,9 we granted petition writ certiorari, 423 911, 214, 46 139 (1975), now affirm judgment Appeals. II 9 As matter, certain elements case dispute. gone reason members employer, local international organization, out strike. involved here bound containing claims forbid strikes. view, asserting Each broad enough reach about itself. Whether called appropriate remedies did, agreed-upon dispute-settlement procedures ultimately American Mfg. Co., 363 564, 80 1343, 1403 (1960); Warrior Gulf 574, 1347, 1409 Enterprise Corp., 593, 1358, 1424 (1960). entitled invoke arbitral process determine legality obtain requiring do so. Gateway Coal Mine Workers, 414 368, 94 629, 38 583 (1974). Furthermore, arbitrated found illegal, relevant statutes construed our cases permit enforce decision. supra. 10 arises asked prayed enjoined permissible Contrary Appeals, ban federal-court injunctions labor This undoubtedly precipitated management binding contracts. demanded supervisory cease performing tasks work. when demand rejected. clauses clear accompanying provisions. behest. 11 holding said "narrow one," situation mandatory Id., 253, S.Ct., 1594. "(F)or guidance district determining grant relief," expressly adopted principles enunciated dissent Sinclair Refining Atkinson, 370 195, 228, 82 1328, 1346, 440 (1962), including proposition 12 " '(w)hen both contractually holds effect; ordered condition his obtaining strike.' U.S., 254, 1594 (emphasis ). 13 driving force behind implement strong congressional preference private settlement mechanisms upon parties. Only extent necessary accommodate lift former's issuance disputes. Striking interfere frustrate processes chosen Quid pro quo promise union's machinery. Even absence undertaking implied where otherwise supra; Teamsters Lucas Flour 369 95, 571, 593 (1962). Otherwise, deprived bargain resolution manner seriously suffer. 14 plainly control case. found, disputed, employer; causes underlying Thus, excluded strikes, possible basis implying existence 382, 639.10 15 provision Section assigns major role agreements, aside enforcement limits never indicated actual threatened course enacting Taft-Hartley Congress rejected proposal prohibition labor-dispute lifted make available agreements. See 205-208, 1334-1335, 216-224, 1340-1343 (dissenting opinion). allegation breaching warrant embraced Markets: 16 "(T)here general anti-strike policy; which, while they breaches threaten additional public policy, anti-injunction prevail." 225, 1344. 17 issue, however, That like others, accordance set Here struck, undertaking. Concededly, arbitrable. arbitrator breach, remedy But deny duty arbitrate; fact, denies ever arbitration. However be, arbitrator, 4(a) prohibiting person "(c)easing refusing perform remain relation employment." If case, proper circumstances prohibitions 4. permitted, hold hearings, fact,11 interpret restore status quo, regulate relationship process. cut existing collectivebargaining contracts,12 limit merits legal 18 what bargained for. Surely cannot here, essential carry arrangements administration typical, outline prearbitration provide "has . satisfactorily adjusted," had. Nowhere coercive kind, let alone judicial injunctions, short terminal litigate. contracted preview facts law.13 Had anticipated regulation relationships arbitration, seems very doubtful resorted rather than arrangements. unmistakable 203(d), 29 173(d), is: "Final adjustment method declared desirable arising agreement." 377, 636. parties' agreement adjust bitrate themselves eviscerated practical purposes try decide stage. 19 suggests least violation, court's sufficiently sure seeking will win still involve findings, interpretations incredible believe always view would; difficult heavily influenced wholly preempted views permitted. Injunctions often permanently issue; contexts expense discouraging factors losing considering relitigate 20 With these considerations mind, far frustrated unless power interlocutory others awaits We agree necessity policies requirements empowering 21 22 So ordered. 23 STEVENS, whom BRENNAN, MARSHALL, POWELL join, dissenting. 24 A normal grievances severable parts another not. 25 Less ago eight my Brethren joined answered quite directly stating authority "depends strike." 380, 638, 583.1 today part enforceable injunction.2 principal base (1) literal Act; (2) fear judiciary "massive" entry business heretofore reserved arbitrators. argument repeatedly central concerns implicated. second unrealistic3 implicitly "a substantial interpretation" sufficient equity jurisdiction. 384, 640. somewhat ambiguous quo; portion unenforceable matter how unambiguous be. respect, I am persuaded correct reasoning landmark 199, requires different result. explain conclusion adequately, review rationale relate presented Eight squarely precluded 440.4 To authorize therefore required overrule point harmonize language reasons compelled First, noted commitment among abuses aimed.5 This, course, declaration itself,6 identifies primary concern protecting labor's ability organize collectively. history activity furtherance recognition, collective bargaining, enactment 1932.7 observed climate relations transformed passage 250-251, 1592, "the foster growth viability organizations hardly retarded anything, goal advanced remedial device merely enforces freely undertook specifically arbitration." 252-253, 1593 (footnote omitted). equally present implicate deals enforceability negotiated formed. 30 Second, emphasized relevance subsequently enacted statute enlarging jurisdiction relief suits without respect amount controversy citizenship viewed supporting process, employers more incentive enter mutually reference value disputes, importance quid arbitration.8 And exchange extends beyond disputes.9 simply wrong argue, does, "of bargain." Ante, 408. violates pledge, interest Markets. contends, least, yet decided does. Accordingly, applies certainty falls 31 Third, relied given controlling effect. Several decisions compel fulfill obligations Railway Act,10 notwithstanding earlier Act." Virginian R. System Federation, 300 515, 563, 57 592, 606, 81 L.Ed. 789. Accord, Railroad Trainmen Howard, 343 768, 774, 72 1022, 1025, 1283; Graham Locomotive Firemen, 338 232, 237-240, 70 14, 17-18, 22. These culminated Chicago, I. 353 30, 39-42, 77 635, 639-641, 622, railroad bar need statutes, pattern legislation." 42, 641. Chicago N. W. Transportation 402 570, 581-584, 91 1731, 1737-1739, 187. Textile Workers Lincoln Mills, 448, 9, 972, conferred agreement. Speaking Douglas legislative "is cloudy confusing" conference report once 'should left usual law.' 452, 916, quoting H.R.Conf.Rep.No.510, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 42 (1947). He added: 32 "Both Senate House took pains 'the law' equivalent form. Both Report indicate bargaining broader either At Report, (S.Rep.No. 105, Sess. (1947),) p. 15, states, 'We feel aggrieved right Federal courts. Such completely accord Wagner Supreme "to end employment parties, .." ' "Congress interested promoting ended Supra, states: 33 'If can break relative impunity, tend stabilize industrial relations. execution promote peace. chief advantage reasonably expect assurance uninterrupted operation term Without effective assuring freedom economic warfare little why desire sign 34 'Consequently, encourage peace faithful performance affecting interstate commerce Our amendment entities commerce.' 35 "Thus 'equally parties.' 15. (H.R.Rep.No. 245, (1947),), new 'makes responsible provides States courts.' repeat, 17, summed up philosophy follows: 'Statutory recognition valid, binding, logical step. 36 higher degree responsibility thereby peace.' 37 "Plainly Viewed light, legislation confer organizations. expresses behalf best obtained way." 453-455, 916-917 direct withdrawn pointed reading bring terms, justification restricting damages subjecting inapposite 458, 918. 39 itself, wording insuperable obstacle law."11 40 Fourth, stressed anomalous consequence Sinclair. state jurisdictions enforced 301(a), intended forum agreements,12 remove forum,13 foreclose reliance 243-247, 1588-1590. incongruous easily squared intent concurrent equal 41 Finally, favoring 242-243, 1587-1588. Since, apart statutory authorization, favors arbitrate. reason, ensuring 247-249, 251-253, 1590-1591, 1592-1593. basic motivating giving them "assurance agreement."14 entirely consider turn. protects conditioned provide, further warranted ordinary equity. 1594.15 conditions demonstrate exists large fundamental aspects national policy. 43 hand, absolute precondition obligation. process; require accept it. 253-255, Coal, 374, 380-384, 638-640. reserves resort self-help must respected.16 limited contours parties.17 44 exercise; performs important actually means applied setting. justify impair abide clause.18 mechanism retain resolving product less significance 45 net ambiguity unforeseen, undescribed, facts. foreseen described precision reasonable give prior decision.19 issue. benefit favor fide final decision.20 advances arguments conclusion: exclusive province arbitrator; erroneously entered effectively deprive render decision; (3) core eliminate risk lawful strike.21 Although acknowledge arguments, think insufficient take outside 47 trilogy22 establishes submitting questions deprives almost prevent submission refuse award.Boys repeated warning usurp functions protect "substantial grievance. 382-384, 639-640. cases, choice properly arbitrated, according procedure. interim determination usurps precludes By definition, supplant he made. Indeed ineffectiveness lends injunction.23 oust function fulfills served. 48 point, rarely quickly issued relies particularly recognize strike.24 demonstrates effective, prompt, equitable Denial effects devastating interests contribute local, members, employer.25 contrary, source goes forward, impose costs strikers, prospect rule authorizes postponement clarification critically vital upheld, avoid interrupted concludes applies. interpreted immunize Itself subjected judge's erroneous greater risk, arbitrability dispute, interpretation." 640; see 380 n. 10, 638. strict result.26 50 considerations, temporarily whenever contains accommodation allows judge apply law" place judge, expert matters misconstrue language, adequate opportunity evidence argument, agreement; convincing clearly clause.27 efficacy procedure, requests, last stage expedited schedule assures soon practicable. stringent insure access foreclosed combined protracted met.28 51 Like reflects, confidence experience decades passed dissipated legitimate impartiality judges management, other, continued familiarity expertise arbitrators administrators regularly specialized terms irreparable injury regardless equities claim 52 Since reverse remand consideration 14.b. provides: "There stoppages interruption impeding No Officers representatives authorize, instigate, aid condone activities. participate activity. recognizes liabilities use influence prevented. Unsuccessful efforts officers terminate conduct paragraph, 'aid' 'condonation' disciplinary actions Officers, committeemen stewards involved." App. 16. 17. step six-part 32: "In event involves previously adjusted, submitted written notice Company." 19. 22-23. oral disagreed Tr. Oral Arg. 44-45, 48-50. "relating drivers dispute." 10. record indicates proceedings taken aspect apparently argued failed 1209 (1975). Ibid., disposition 61 Stat. 156, 185(a). "Suits organization industry defined organizations, having regard parties." 57; Memorandum Respondent 13. 9. 70, 104, "No permanent growing prohibit persons participating (as herein defined) doing, singly concert, following acts: "(a) Ceasing employment; "(b) Becoming remaining member section "(c) Paying to, withholding from, unemployment benefits insurance, moneys things value; "(d) aiding being proceeded in, prosecuting, State; "(e) Giving publicity of, advertising, speaking, patrolling, fraud violence; "(f) Assembling peaceably act promotion dispute; "(g) Advising notifying intention acts specified; "(h) Agreeing "(i) Advising, urging, causing inducing violence specified, 25. presence makes live job. Super Tire Engineering McCorkle, 416 115, 124-125, 1694, 1699, (1974); Bus Employees Missouri, 374 74, 77-78, 83 1657, 1659-1660, 763 (1963). arose expired, stipulated, 25, govern challenge not, part, protest assignments. F.2d, 1211 7. Second Circuit Fifth Sixth Circuits, Amstar Corp. Meat Cutters, 468 1372 (CA5 1972); Plain Dealer Pub. Cleveland Typographical 520 1220 (CA6 1975), cert. denied, 909, 3221, 1217; Steel 519 1236 reh. 526 376 (1976), 910, 1217, odds Eighth NAPA Pittsburgh, Inc. Automotive Chauffeurs, 502 321 (CA3) (en banc), 419 1049, 625, 644 Island Creek 507 650 (CA3), 877, 150, 110 (1975); Armco 505 1129 (CA4 1974), Pilot Freight Carriers, Teamsters, 497 311 (CA4), 869, 95 127, 107 Wilmington Shipping Longshoremen, 86 L.R.R.M. 2846 498, 296 Monongahela Power Electrical 484 1973); Valmac Industries Food Handlers, 263 (CA8 granted, vacated remanded, 906, 3215, 1213; Associated Gen. Contractors Operating Engineers, 269 Seventh intermediate position. Hyster Independent Towing Assn., 89 sub nom. Assn. Kewanee, 966 3220, 1216; Gary Hobart Water NLRB, 511 284, 925, 269, 252 cf. Inland 293 1211, courts, 653-654; 1132-1133; 337 810, 815 (E.D. La.), rev'd grounds, 299-300, assumed implies engage wrong. furnishes here. finally occurred based critical fulcrum called. Of depended "whether statement preparatory existed Absent factor, Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 52(a). embroil massive litigation. 1972, most recent year comprehensive data published, million workers 150,000 Bureau Statistics, Directory National Employee Associations 87-88 (1973). order, appealable, 1292(a)(1). read conclude "s empowers 381, There proposition. relating terminated safety "prospectively controversy." 373, 634. defiance award dispute"; nevertheless, propriety 405. expressed "embroil litigation," 411 12, supposedly supported 1972. figures idea number arise, lead enjoinable shed light commitment. past dozen arisen. 404 Future character would, minimized clarifying amendments clauses. One week Sinclair, Yellow Transit, 711, 1293, 792, Per curiam citing dissenters whose substantially concurred Transit bind 711-712, 1293-1294. those availability 20, Infra. Referring 912, "rejected contention proscriptions type noting 'part parcel aimed,' 918, manifests encouraged. 108." 242, 1588 States, limited, hereby "Whereas prevailing conditions, developed governmental owners property corporate forms ownership association, individual unorganized worker commonly helpless exercise liberty labor, acceptable employment, wherefore, free decline associate fellows, full self-organization, designation own choosing, negotiate interference, restraint, coercion agents, self-organization concerted activities mutual protection; therefore, definitions limitations upon, enacted." 102. quoted approval neutral Special Atkinson-Sinclair Committee Bar Association Law Section: 'Any opposition Nevertheless, seem scarcely (in enjoined). primarily widespread dissatisfaction tendency "doctrines tort law lawfulness depend social policy." (Citation omitted.) Where used fashion judicially created comply agreed. Moreover, practicable pressing impartial tribunal establish purpose.' 253 22, 1593, Committee, Proceedings 242 "As indicated, obligation, implied, 455, 917. Any arrangement necessarily expeditious eliminated. true, avenues redress, open settled substitute immediate halt illegal prosecuted aggravate strife delay early difficulties union." 247-248, 1591 (footnotes William E. Arnold Carpenters, 417 19, 2069, 2073, 620, 381-382 638-639. Committee: 'Under laws, maintain resulting discipline involved. alternatives feasible. Discharge strikers inexpedient lack qualified replacements adverse plant. damage unsatisfactory losses hard calculate hesitate exacerbate bringing action. Hence, pledge effectuate policy.' 248-249, 1591, 7, 242. Feller, General Theory Collective Bargaining Calif.L.Rev. 663, 757-760 577, amended, 1185, §§ 151-188. considered rendered inapplicable proceeding rejection repeal Acts fully canvassed accepted dissenters, later 204-210, 1333-1336, 440; 220-225, 1342-1344 (Brennan, J., dissenting); 249, 1591. nevertheless revives candidly overruled arguing, wholesale 209-210, 1336. 2074; Dowd Box Courtney, 368 502, 519, 483. Avco Aero Lodge 735, 390 557, 88 1235, 126. 454, 916. reminded us objective using common serve needs.' 379, 637, 582, 1352, 1409. extended coextensive alter preconditions injunction: corresponding commitment, satisfaction 387-388, 638-640, Illinois Conference 454 1324 (CA7 1972). particular, extend 407-408, Longshoremen Marine Trade 389 64, 77-79 (Douglas, concurring dissenting part); New Orleans S.S. Longshore 1968), 393 828, 92, 99, Dunau, Three Problems Arbitration, 55 Va.L.Rev. 427, 473-477 (1969). asserts 411. endow grievances. Indeed, suggested abandonment 239. Cf. Stokely-Van Camp, Thacker, 394 715, 719-720 (WD Wash. 1975); Note, Applicability Refusals Cross Picket Line, 76 Col.L.Rev. 113, 136-140 (1976). scope whatsoever, encouraging remains unclear. argues barred usually complains normally receives rule, initiates contends fairness dictates receive outcome However, origins go forward 737-740. supports, undermines, threat "massive litigation" 12. ignores special 567-568, 1403; 582-583, 1352-1353; 597-599, 1361-1362, 1424. 8, Supra. Construction Laborers Curry, 371 542, 550, 531, 536, 514; Liner Jafco, Inc., 375 301, 308, 84 391, 347. Curry State picketing reviewable state-court mootness completion construction site. pre-empted law. finality holdings rested partly frustration became relevant. international. attach fact. emphasizes conflicting determinations Coal. interpretation," all. likelihood vastly larger standard find obscures misreading 408-409 invoked unsafe mine substantive interpretation, explicitly commits umpire disagreements 'as agreement.' 640 Consistently holding, remained disagree finds prohibited. govern, withstands arbitrators' awards. 1361-1362. '(T)he must, occurring continue, committed; cause suffer issuance.' 1594, 1346 dissenting).

Category: 6