Document: 382 U.S. 423 86 S.Ct. 594 15 L.Ed.2d 501 BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS et al., Appellants,v.CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. al. Robert N. HARDIN, Prosecuting Attorney for the Seventh Judicial Circuit ofArkansas, etc., Appellants, v. CHICAGO, Nos. 69, 71. Argued Dec. 8 and 9, 1965. Decided Jan. 31, 1966. [Syllabus from pages 423-424 intentionally omitted] Jack L. Lessenberry James E. Youngdahl, Little Rock, Ark., appellants. V. Light, Dennis Lyons, Washington, D.C., appellees. Opinion of Court by Mr. Justice BLACK, announced Chief WARREN. 1 Appellees, a group interstate railroads operating in Arkansas, brought this action United States District asking that court to declare two Arkansas statutes unconstitutional enjoin Attorneys, appellants here, enforcing or attempting enforce state statutes. The railroad brotherhoods, also were allowed intervene order defend validity One those statutes, enacted 1907, makes it an offense line more than 50 miles haul freight trains consisting 25 cars without having train crew not 'less engineer, fireman, conductor three brakemen * *.'1 second statute challenged railroads, 1913, any with lines 100 [Amicus Curiae length engage switching activities cities designated populations, one (1) foreman (3) helpers. *'2 complaint charged that, as applied plaintiff both operate 'arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory unreasonable' manner violation Due Process Equal Protection Clauses Fourteenth Amendment; (2) unduly interfere with, burden needlessly increase cost commerce Commerce Clause, Art. I, § 8, cl. 3, Constitution, contrary National Transportation Policy expressed Interstate Act; discriminate against favor local intrastate commerce; (4) seeking regulate control number persons working on locomotives invade field legislation preempted Federal Government primarily through federal enactment Public Law 88 108 passed Congress 1963.3 This law was avert nationwide strike threatened labor dispute between national brotherhoods over employees should be used trains. 2 In their admitted had separate occasions, 1911,4 1916,5 again 1931,6 sustained constitutionality same Amendment Clause challenges made present action. alleged, however, improvements have now been so great locomotives, cars, couplers, brakes, trackage, roadbeds, methods facts which prior holdings rested no longer exist. defendant Attorneys answered asserting Acts denying there change conditions significant justify departure Court's decisions. brotherhoods' answer alleged modern developments actually multiplied dangers railroading thus making necessary ever. pleadings therefore, at least some extent, presented factual issues calling introduction determination evidence under Court. See, e.g., Southern Pacific Co. State Arizona, 325 761, 65 1515, 89 L.Ed. 1915. At stage trial, claiming substantial reference relevant issues, filed motion summary judgment Rule 56, Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. alleging that: Both are 'pre-empted conflict therewith, to-wit: 88—108 award Arbitration Board No. 282 pursuant thereto; Railway Labor Act *; particularly preamble thereto'; constitute Clause; deny equal protection laws Amendment. Without hearing three-judge convened consider case railroads' judgment, holding, judge dissenting, 'in proceedings thereunder, therefore unenforceable plaintiffs *.' 239 F.Supp. 1, 29. did purport rule other questions complaint. We noted probable jurisdiction, 381 949, 85 1802, 14 723. 3 A few weeks ago held Swift & Wickham, 111, 258, allegation is pre-empted does allege unconstitutionality call convening 28 U.S.C. 2281 (1964 ed.). Thus, Swift, pre-emption issue standing alone would justified court, hence direct appeal us 1253 being Commerce, Process, Clauses. briefs submitted after oral argument argued all these constitutional insubstantial matter they insufficient make appropriate court. cannot accept argument. Whatever ultimate may we dismiss them face. Nor fact keep case. Had tried enjoined enforcement preemption alone, jurisdiction Florida Lime Avocado Growers, Inc. Jacobsen, 362 73, 80 568, 4 568. true here where basis but left undecided. Thus proceed merits. I. first question pre-emption. unquestionably has power who shall man commerce. absence congressional subject, extensive own field, protect safety public. said Missouri Pac. R. Norwood, previous decisions upholding 5 'In clearly purpose do will intended prevent exertion police states regulation men employed such crews.' 283 U.S., 256, 51 S.Ct., 462. 6 See case, 290 600, 54 227. 7 view Norwood preceding cases, charges preemption, whether adding 1963 compulsory arbitration legislation, pre-empt supersede like or, stated another way, application 'would frustrate (1963) statfeurs Helpers Union Morton, 377 252, 84 1253, 1257, 12 280. Since unions gained strength country problem manning constant unions. Some States, believing perhaps many might voluntarily assume expense hire enough workers operations safe could be, providing minimum size crews. Where effect crews settled collective bargaining, though difficulty. It sensitive touchy explosive bargaining impasse triggered contend permanently 1907 1913 Such permanent supersession would, course, amount outright repeal Congress. 9 particular eventually led began 1959 when Nation's major notified considered right management unrestricted discretion decide how trains, intend submit subject future. protested, serving counter-proposals railroads. As result representatives each side met try negotiate new agreement. On negotiators stuck budge. insisted changed conditions, substitution diesel electrically propelled engines steam engines, firemen completely unnecessary employees. They continued insist free themselves used, if all. Throughout negotiations, up now, fireman needed even engine, aid engineer lookout purposes, help repairs adjustments while moving, engine reason fail function. Agreement proving impossible President Eisenhower, acting request sides, appointed Presidential Commission adjust dispute. After long investigation consideration reported. Its report unsatisfactory wholly satisfactory settlement. dragged on. Another President's Advisory Committee Labor-Management failed bring about 10 All efforts agreement failed, Kennedy, July 22, 1963, reported 29 'can expected initiate work rules changes. And thereupon can strike.' Nation,' he said, 'stands brink rail very short order, create widespread economic chaos distress.' Pointing out disastrous consequences occur take place, recommended provide 'for interim remedy awaiting results further parties.' He 2-year period during parties public better inform changes proposed either party agree approval, disapproval modification accordance procedures provisions section Kennedy repeatedly emphasized his hope bargaining. belief advances technology reduce force, bear reduction fall entirely lose jobs. warned highly "for enjoy reasonable harsh effects too sudden change." message desire pass finally dispose train, instead 'It inappropriate general our relations basis' "revolutionary carry high price disruption (that) exceed value improvements." way indicate part disturb existing pattern full-crew them, temporarily permanently. 11 bill change. binding resolved Commission. brotherhood witness testified before Senate apprehension given requested States' superseded orders Commission.7 Subsequent House Committees dropped vested settlements.8 Instead provided establishment board consist seven members, four members named among additional three. resolve questions. Their complete final disposition exceeding years date awards effect. Awards claim laws. hold neither itself nor text contain specifically pre-empting specific saving clause indicating lack intent them. Appellees argue, terms inconsistent operation valid. But wanted little possible solving it, note laws, regulated agreements. point spokesman commenting jobs lost accepted proposal, '25.9 percent positions yard service must maintained because so-called (listing 13 including Arkansas).'9 appears, need eliminate impasse, examination legislative history confirms intention superseding passage Act. proposal interpreted explained Foreign Secretary Labor. told Committee: 'I attention statements Railroad Company Supreme 1930 assertion reflected issuance ruling, termination time parties, affecting full law.'10 Chairman several occasions emphatically hearings floor intended, passed, occasion said: 16 'This raised course committee. Questions asked various people representing industry witnesses employees' representatives, rather clear affect committee executive session discussed concluded page included, made, language: 'The modify relating trains."11 17 then went tell House, referring holding 18 'Therefore, since mention since, shows, I am confident affected bill. 19 think it.' 20 Many quoted above enacting sentiment voiced well officials Nation. seek offset carefully expressions single incident. Representative Harris, reporting bill, law, Smith Virginia, Rules interrupted Harris statement set below.12 Congressman hardly cast doubt minds accuracy substance Smith's was: 21 Constitution courts overcome clause.' was, correct relevance exercise 22 face II. 23 ground 'constitute commerce.' Aside apparently rejected cases merit. based exempts less track track. None State's turns none eight say difference treatment State, differing mileage rational contend. Certainly regulations different rational, reasonable, desirable. record classification according constitutes discrimination Clause. Paul, 373 132, 137, 83 1210, 1214, 248. 24 reversed cause remanded undecided its judgment. ordered. Judgment directions. 26 FORTAS took decision 27 DOUGLAS, dissenting. ample Unlike majority, believe exercised power, respectfully dissent conclusion contrary. prompted (77 Stat. 132) represented, sense, only exposed top large iceberg. Lurking beneath surface controversy twin problems automation technological unemployment. aware developing innovation job security. When sought solution pending crisis industry, reminded 30 '* much broader problem. Unemployment, created automation, shift areas, overall shortage market demand, social burden. 31 exclusively acute industry. Forty fewer beginning decade handle substantially volume traffic. rapid replacement 97 tonnage confronted firemen, spent career work, unpleasant prospect human obsolescence. established part, close gap work.' 32 referred Eisenhower's 1960,1 investigating arose elimination service. study, issued containing detailed findings aspects Commission's recommendations included diesels switchmen. financial benefits separated 33 desirable problem, existence 'full crew' impossible: 34 '(M)ost kind 1920. These envision operations. feel respect application. recognize difficulty applying enacted. How restriction lifted, goes beyond charge.'2 35 Then came 88—108, empowers 'resolve matters agreement' 'shall issues.' Section 7(a) lays down standards Board: 36 '(T)he upon adequate transportation service'; 37 interests carrier affected'; 38 '(D)ue narrowing areas disagreement accomplished mediation.' 39 Today concludes shear off visible portion iceberg, leaving bar resolution matters. 40 That plain. directed necessity freights declared general, required. boards, brakemen, switchmen, helpers fixed.3 compel use virtually operations, fix levels usually fixed awards.4 lacking are, light decision, enact thereby, effect, imperil it. provision negotiated command Local Intern. Broth. Teamsters, Chauffuers, Warehousemen America, AFL—CIO Oliver, 358 283, 79 297, 312, prescribe see California Taylor, 353 553, 77 1037, 1034. something directives, resolving labor-management dispute, direction authority 41 concerned central issues: diesel-electric electric firing boilers performed; makeup 'consist' road yard. recognized governed 'by administrative decision.' Indeed, situations involve overriding disregarding conflicting regulations. Any realistic scope nature reached necessarily endow conflicts what deemed policy hand other. 42 far-reaching; realm economics, technology, sociology. informed analysis, persuasion, debate able resolve. Board's members5 days hearings, received testimony recorded nearly 5,000 transcript, examined 200 documentary exhibits, inspection trips yards Chicago area. award6 concurred dissented members.7 opinion neutral details conclusions panel reached. states, 43 'although presently performing useful services, (Presidential Railroad) 'that firemen-helpers essential efficient continue requiring assignment diesels."8 44 found, crew, 'the assure undue workloads determined conditions. prescription unrealistic.' issues. And, added, 45 myriad arrangements numerous inconsistencies equally rules, originating half-century ago, anachronistic reflect conditions.' concern apparent reading members' opinion. puts it: 46 fairly pervaded entire proceeding. presentations arguments organizations carriers, inquiries counsel.' 47 position, Board, function so. tools controversy. establishes procedures, already utilized issue. 48 conclude legislation. Of shown otherwise, dispositive. bits pieces cited regarded controlling intent. If anything, suggests refused suggestion wished avoid expressly 49 majority points immediately Smith, Committee. Under circumstances, seems regard Harris' views authoritative. Wirtz, Court, followed legal memorandum Secretary. orders.9 express disclaimer called Testifying Committee, Wirtz so.10 General Counsel wants doubly certain, example, consequence follows done' stating intended.11 To responded: appreciate your frank response, sort air do. There expression thought clarity wherever guidance effort responsibility directed.'12 52 53 'If desired absolutely Congress, done just phrase. *'13 Despite advice, include 'saving' clause.14 55 faced, threat crippling strike. seriousness unemployment arising automation. responded establishing procedure industry's pressing 'safety' inconceivable solve 56 sum, 'There nothing indicates magnitude effective consists regulation.' 23. 57 Although prime holds lawmakers cloaked weasellike words reach roots With respect, dissent. Ark.Laws 116, Ark.Stat.Ann. §§ 73—720 73—722 (1957). Ark.Act 67 73—726 73—729 following 157 Chicago, R.I. P.R. 219 453, 275, 290. St. Louis I.M. S.R. 240 518, 443, 60 776. 249, 458, 75 1010; 227, 78 527. latter below, 24. Hearings S.J.Res. 102, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 629. S.Rep. 459, 9. 707. H.J.Res. 565, 78. 109 Cong.Rec. 16122 (1963). Report H.R.Rep. 713, 14. 'Mr. SMITH Virginia. Speaker, colloquy gentleman (Mr. SISK), chairman HARRIS), raises previously House. yesterday Rules. remain silent gives exclusive know precedents found question, purely authority, comes dealing clause. simply my position whatever worth. EDMONDSON. yield? yield Oklahoma. thank distinguished yielding me point. Would mean prevail involving switch operations? Now, you know, actions gone putting almost everything Executive Order 10891, Nov. 1960, U.S.Code Congressional Administrative News p. 1693. (1962), 64. 90% firemen's seniority district, except required 'deadman' control. addition, available retained employment protective which, years' engineer. Firemen offered comparable position. whereby basis, certain Board. applicable main-line brakeman branchline provide, exceptions, helper. requires every permits abolition positions. two. Similar appear Ralph T. Seward. Benjamin Aaron J. Healy. Representing carriers Guy W. Knight Wolfe. H. Gilbert McDonald. supra. 'disappointed (the) provisions' award, 'care diligence' displayed reaching decision. contended erroneous. 'lookout assigned performed head perform related functions signal passing endanger impair efficiency members.' mechanical duties 'be locomotive shop maintenance personnel times.' Finally, relief critical importance event incapacitation. usual presence cab obviates emergency.' 112 113. considering form President, contemplated reflects superseded. bears repeating (S.Rep. Sess.) despite references Committee's hearings. accompanying 14, infra. 111. Id., 614. Ibid. 401. possibility representative Brotherhood Locomotive Engineers testified: DAVIDSON. Chairman, handed read into record, may. 'Senator PASTORE. right. ICC, today, passes, bills. don't want that. You record. check that.' 478. Executives' Association certainly visualize bare (of) authorizing decreases consist—either enginecrew traincrew—would overrule Perhaps explains alacrity embraced recommendation endorsed Id. Court: 'A review reveal others not. perfectly Houses effectively although amended respects concluded.' F.Supp., pp. 22—23.

Category: 8