Document: 357 U.S. 93 78 S.Ct. 1011 2 L.Ed.2d 1186 LOCAL 1976, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS AMERICA, A.F.L. et al., Petitioners,v.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD. NATIONAL BOARD, Petitioner, v. GENERAL DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN HELPERS UNION, NO. 886, AFL-CIO. 850, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION MACHINISTS, AFL-CIO, Nos. 127, 273, 324. Argued March 11, 12, 1958. Decided June 16, Mr. Arthur Garrett Los Angeles, Cal., for the petitioners Local 1976 al. Dominick L. Manoli, Washington, D.C., N.L.R.B. Louis P. Poulton, Pasadena, Md., petitioner 850. Herbert S. Thatcher, 886. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered opinion of Court. 1 These cases involve so-called 'hot cargo' provisions in collective bargaining agreements. More particularly, they raise question whether such a provision is defense to charge against union an unfair labor practice under § 8(b)(4)(A) National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 61 Stat. 136, 141, 29 U.S.C. 158(b)(4)(A), U.S.C.A. 158(b)(4)(A). No. 127 arises out dispute between carpenter unions and employer engaged building construction trade Southern California. The Sand Door Plywood Company exclusive distributor California doors manufactured by Paine Lumber Oshkosh, Wisconsin. Watson Dreps are millwork contractors who purchase from Sand. Havstad Jensen general were, at time involved, hospital Ageles. parties master agreement negotiated with United Brotherhood Carpenters Joiners America on behalf its affiliated district councils locals, including unions. This agreement, comprehensively regulating relations employees, includes that, 'workmen shall not be required handle non-union material.' 3 In August 1954 purchased were site Dreps. On morning 17, Fleisher, business agent came notified Steinert, Jensen's foreman, that nonunion could hung. Steinert therefore ordered employees cease handling doors. When Nicholson, superintendent, appeared job asked Fleisher why workers had been prevented doors, he stated stopped until it determined or nonunion. Subsequent negotiations officers failed produce would permit installed. 4 basis charges filed complaint duly issued, Board found induced encouraged engage strike concerted refusal Paine's order force doing Paine, all violation 8(b)(4)(A). 113 1210. Court Appeals Ninth Circuit enforced Board's cease-and-desist order, 241 F.2d 147, we granted certiorari, 355 808, 13, 27. sole tendered petition certiorari concerned relation hot cargo proscribed 8(b)(4)(A).1 5 273 324 arise Oklahoma City which certain said have five common carriers goods another American Iron Machine Works was controversy 850 International Association Machinists, representative production maintenance called company's plants. Picketing plants normally served making pickup deliveries, so hauled freight own trucks loading platforms carriers. Machinists followed carriers' picketed them there, without clear their only Iron. addition, there evidence expressly requested some freight. Teamsters Union instructed All except one move freight, but nevertheless refused do so. Teamsters' contract contained 'Members allowed haul company, provided, this Management Act 1947.' 6 Iron, issued complaints both Teamsters, appeals instructions violated 8(b)(4)(A), notwithstanding agreement. 115 800. District Columbia set aside because (No. 273), 324). 101 U.S.App.D.C. 80, 247 71. We three conflicts among circuits meaning importance problem administration consolidated argument. 42, 56, L.Ed. 27.2 7 Section provides 'It organization agents * (4) in, induce encourage any course employment use, manufacture, process, transport, otherwise work goods, articles, materials, commodities perform services, where object thereof is: (A) forcing requiring other person using, selling, handling, transporting, dealing products producer, processor, manufacturer, *.' 8 Whatever may Congress preceding passage Taft-Hartley concerning evil forms 'secondary boycotts' desirability outlawing them, no sweeping prohibition fact enacted section does speak generally secondary boycotts. It describes condemns specific conduct directed objectives. forbids refuse when him third party. Employees must induced; refusal; require person. Thus, much might argumentatively fall within broad somewhat vague concept boycott terms prohibited. A voluntarily his reasons, perhaps unionization employers will protect competitive position identifies interests those union, covered statute. Likewise, free approach persuade boycott, long refrains specifically prohibited means coercion through inducement employees. 9 From these considerations what statute, true scope limits legislative purpose emerge. primary employer, whom principally odds, has absolute assurance consequences boycott. Nor persons deal either injuriously affected restrictions commerce flow public. read words 'other person' phrase 'forcing extend protection effects himself, consents consent cannot appropriately part seen fit public wholesale condemnation boycotts, since if agrees brought about than practice. 10 relevant recall was, marked degree, result conflict compromise strong contending forces deeply held views role organized economic life Nation appropriate balance struck uncontrolled power management further respective interests. counsels wariness finding policy boycotts when, statute itself, interested just unable secure embodiment law. raised affords striking illustration truism declare Court's. judicial function confined applying after ascertaining enacted. But ascertainment, is, construing legislation, nothing like mechanical endeavor. accomplished subtlest modern 'brain' machines. Because infirmities language limited science drafting, inevitably enters into statutes play judgment materials. Most relevant, course, very expressed extract most appropriate. Of entire designed interest, sense shielded matter how about. Congress' more narrowly conceived. aimed restrict area industrial insofar achieved prohibiting obvious, widespread, and, evidently judged, dangerous widen conflict: neutral employers, themselves dispute, strikes refusals goods. light thus defined now before judged. 11 provision, agreements cases, can absence unquestionably violation. checkered career decisions first tribunal nine years ago. Conway's Express case, re 1949, 87 972, affirmed sub nom. Rabouin Board, Cir., 195 906, (Members Houston, Murdock, Gray) repugnant pursuant apparently acquiesced. Chairman Herzog concurred facts particular did license itself take action page 983 note 33. Member Reynolds dissented ground invoked Pittsburgh Plate Glass Chauffeurs Union, 1953, 105 740, also acquiesced enforcement provisions, dissent (Memebers Styles Peterson; took part) adhered Conway decision. Since 'the proceeding consented 'unfair goods' contracts, employees' failure 8(b)(4)(A).' 744. 12 McAllister 1954, 110 1769, different position. Members Rodgers Beeson view ineffective waive They overruling case declaration Farmer distinguishable He contrary execution mutual adherence face express Murdock Peterson advance even assuming 13 Still mutations individual members place Carpenters, 1955, 1210, here 127. Leedom maintained although clauses direct appeal manner assert rights contract, violates evidently, stoppage made clear. principal violate Peterson, dissenting, McAllister. See (General Millwork Corp.), 1084, 1086—1087, dissenting pages 1088—1090, 242 932. 14 General Drivers 1956, 800, 324, Bean relied forbidden previous opinions. dissented, noting acquiesced, doctrine last clearly repudiated. Milk (Crowley's Co.), 116 1408, orders reversed denied & Dairy Emp. etc., 245 817. 15 decision handed down granting Court, Truck (Genuine Parts 1957, 119 399, two Jenkins, rested broader taken cases: carrier subject Interstate Commerce 24 379, amended Aug. 9, 1935, 49 543, §§ 301—327, clause invalid inception recognized having effect. strongly suggested desirable establish rule respect mere existence should deemed prima facie 8(b)(4) (A). earlier opinions, considering implications Act. solely case. objecting particularly conceived extreme suggestion pointing majority appears abandoned theory review them. 16 argument stated. agreed consent, sought withdrawn actual said, statutory purpose, 'strike refusal' requiring' employer. Only consideration circumstances immediately surrounding disregard history parties, possible say coerced engaging If neutrals pressures involuntarily disputes others, involved dispute. least takes steps repudiate inform contractual urge effective enforce 17 present rejected comporting drawn projected onto practical realities relations. agree, heedful strength contrary. There show directly considered prohibitions Nevertheless, seems probable freedom choice contemplated concrete situation calling exercise policy. Such choice, presures—whether maintain normal concern his—must federal available private entered parties. Licorice Co. 309 350, 364, 60 569, 577, 84 799. employer's intelligent impact responsible, merely up covering multitude subjects, often abstract manner, rightly assumed hoped effectively limited. 18 Certainly counter interpretation. described refusal,' though provision. altered simply forced carry prior engagement rather another. important consideration, peculiarly cognizance closeness familiarity practicalities possibility well kind condemned. upon used bring allow invoke justify give transmit moment relieve employers. 19 Thus inducements likewise concluded not, assumption obligation, proscribed. conclusion reached considerable experience difficulty determining significance silence. intend observe truly sanction support voluntary become activity exists. remains sanctioned supported exercised potentiality self-help great. Faced already progress, find substantially difficult decide go usual His 'acquiescence' anything free. effect policy, unreasonable insist, done, expresses framework necessary preserve decreed. given great weight, ought our estimate revelant factors. 20 occasion consider invalidity such. inducing objectives As used. commission police element observance constitute Genuine necessarily follow totally context still legal radiations affecting need 21 brief suggests 301—327. recent referred to, position, stating 'invalid operative far (the Relations) concerned.' true, entering obligations provide nondiscriminatory service reasonable practices. 216, 558, 316, 316. carrier's void, follows void purposes down, Commission ruled, Galveston Line Corp. Ada Motor Lines, Inc., 73 M.C.C. 617 (Dec. 1957), relieved clause. 22 significant limitations careful draw determine, matter, legality clauses, whatever duty imposed certificates. authority determine duty. instance whether, compelling considerations, duty, makes determination presented it. Other agencies government, interpreting administering entrusted enforcement, cautious complicate Commission's act fixed universal prefer develop pragmatic case-by-case adjudication. 23 enforcing interfering way consistent shipper. existed. mean purposes, nor mechanically carried over interpretation involving significantly purposes. Whether justification defining national transportation governing performed shipper, obligation Common factors emerge adjudication questions, are, nevertheless, distinct questions independent considerations. freely 8(b)(4)(A); S.S. 316 31, 62 86 1246, admonished apply policies single-mindedly ignore equally congressional remedy reinstatement strike—worked weaken effectiveness mutiny crew vessel. Presumed illegality abuse discretion giving remedy. Much less abandon inquiry requirements accept standards elaborated agency wholly 25 reasons forth opinion, consequence 26 judgments affirmed. cause remanded grant Board. 27 324—Affirmed. 28 273—Reversed remanded. DOUGLAS, CHIEF JUSTICE BLACK concur, dissenting. 30 concedes Act,1 140, I fail see, therefore, 31 typical issue here: 32 'Workmen 33 That bargained every How parties—how high low scale values—we know. records product bargaining, coercion. inclusion contracts Enforcing agreement—standing coercive practices aimed. Enforcement conducive peace. Disregard agreements—the flouting them—is disruptive. philosophy 906; think squares 34 capricious. lawful abide unlawful reneges. 35 hostile attitude patronizing 'unfair' goes deep history. American, expression various history2 Americans buy British tea, Abolitionists slave-made products, convictmade Unions principle aid protection. 157, indeed, recognizes guarantee 'Employees right activities protection.' noticed Apex Hosiery Leader, 310 469, 503, 982, 997, 1311, elimination 'competition legitimate objective. 36 reason agree phase policies, acquiesce surmised. Perhaps sees eye union. receives concessions exchange assistance 37 Certain sense. What Judge Clark Employees, 817, 822, yet answered: 38 'In done unilaterally employer; specifies defines 'strike' 'refusal' work. obviously impose additional then constitutes see difference tasks exempted offensive health safety performance local itself.' 39 today Committee strain outlaw accepted, used.3 evils declared interest. however, fabric leave policy-making rush undo century imbedded labormanagement word intimates unlawful. unnecessary contentions issues resolved Appeals: (1) stop acted Jensen, capacity member bound rules. (2) substantial outside Irvine People State California, 347 128, 129—130, 74 381, 98 561; Rule 23(c) Revised Rules Supreme States, quickly disposed of. rendered moot because, filing picketing ceased containing no-strike danger recurrent violation, States W. T. Grant Co., 345 629, 632—633, 894, 897, 97 1303, justified concluding circumstances, add reached. Machinists' contention foreclosed conflicting evidence. reads follows: agents— '(4) self-employed join person; Millis Montgomery, Organized (1945), 581 seq.; Wolman, Boycott Trade (1916), cc. II, III. 'Sympathetic trades industries finds Any looks conditions threat working standards. Consequently provided material coming destined manufacturers operating limit reduces considerably list restricted manufacturers, many never nominal jurisdiction. Another alternative prohibits materials whose strike. Agreements factory repairs hauling away premises workers.' Agreement Provisions. Dept. Labor, H.R.Doc.No.723, 77th Cong., 2d Sess. 32. And Collective Bargaining Provisions, Dept H.R.Doc.No.282, 81st 1st 37; Strikes Lockouts (Preliminary Draft) February 1947, pp. 28—32; Lockouts. Bureau Affairs, 77:351.

Category: 6