Document: 336 U.S. 301 69 S.Ct. 584 93 L.Ed. 691 ALGOMA PLYWOOD & VENEER CO.v.WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD. No. 216. Argued Nov. 18, 1948. Decided March 7, 1949. Mr. Roger C. Minahan, of Milwaukee, Wis., for petitioner. Beatrice Lampert, Madison, respondent. [Argument Counsel from page 302 intentionally omitted] Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion Court. 1 The Algoma Plywood Veneer Co. manufactures in Kewaunee County, Wisconsin, products which it is named. Ninety-five per cent its output sold interstate commerce. In 1942 National Labor Relations Board held an election at plant, outcome was certification Local 1521 Carpenters and Joiners Union as bargaining representative all production employees, about 650 number. 1943, under pressure Department War Board, agreed to a maintenance-of-membership clause contract with 1521. That carried over year part effective following April 29, 1946. One Victor Moreau refused pay dues, on Jan. 1947, notified him that unless he paid up by 13, would be discharged. On 14, 1947 presence representatives Company Union, said rather quit than dues Union. And so Vice-President told collect his go home. 2 27, filed Wisconsin Employment complaint charging unfair labor practice Wis.Stat. § 111.06(1)(c) 1, provides: 3 'It shall employer * encourage membership any organization discrimination regard hiring, tenure or other terms conditions employment; pr vided, not prohibited entering into all-union agreement employees collective unit, where least two thirds such employes voting have voted affirmatively secret ballot favor referendum conducted board. *' 4 No had been plant. accordingly, 30, ordered cease desist giving effect clause, offer reinstatement, make whole loss pay. petitioned Circuit Court County review order, enforcement. judgment 21, modified order striking award back pay, but otherwise affirmed it. May 11, 1948, Supreme insofar sustained jurisdiction issue require reinstatement directed enforcement back-pay award. 252 Wis. 549, 32 N.W.2d 417. 5 At every stage proceedings contested ground exclusive authority 10(a) Act, 49 Stat. 453, 29 U.S.C. 160(a), U.S.C.A. asserted repugnancy 8(3) 452, 158(3), 158(3). We granted certiorari 28 1257(3), because important bearing these issues upon distribution power our federal system. 335 812, 55. 6 discharge orders preceded Management colloquially known Taft-Hartley 61 136, 141 et seq., seq. judgments were rendered after came force. If Act gave affirmative protection discharging employee union-security failure maintain union membership, necessary decide whether adoption retroactively removed equally previously invalid. Since, however, we do find conflict between law issued either are relieved defining respective applicability Acts. 7 seeking show no orders, petitioner points first set forth margin.1 It argues grant 'exclusive' prevent 'any practice' thereby displaced State deal practices, provided course one affecting But this argument implies untenable assumptions. requires disregard parenthetical phrase '(listed section 8)'; depends attaching stands, 'and agency practices listed 8.' 8 term 'unfair art having independent significance transcends statutory definition. free (apart pre-emption Congress) characterize wrong kind employee, statutorily created common law, practice.' time when adopted, courts many States, some circumstances, denied validity agreements. See Teller, Disputes Collective Bargaining 170 (1940). Here has attached their called voluntary observance those met Had sponsors meant deny policies inconsistent unrestricted union-shop contracts, surely they made purpose manifest. So far appears Committee Reports, designed, language declares, merely preclude administration remedies proscribed 8. House Report, summarizing provisions section, adds, 'The thus paramount dealing described bill.' H.R. Rep. 969, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. 21. also identical 972, 21 1147, Cong. 23. Senate Report describes 'intended dispel confusion resulting dispersion establish single administrative quasi-judicial connection development Federal American regarding bargaining.' S. 573, 15. 9 contention Wagner swept aside respecting shop must therefore rejected. provision effect, could only 8(3), explicitly deals condition employment. now turn consideration section. 10 Section provides 11 'By hire employment discourage organization: Provided, nothing statute United making therein, if 9(a), appropriate unit covered made.' 12 argued, therefore, cannot forbid what permits. short answer disclaims national policy hostile closed forms agreement. This obvious inference drawn choice words 'nothing States,' confirmed legislative history. 13 bill become say 8(3): 14 proviso third unfair-labor question shop. Propaganda wide-spread attaches special legal sanctions seeks impose industry. propaganda absolutely false. reason insertion follows: According interpretations, 7(a) Industrial Recovery 48 198, assuring freedom 'to organize bargain collectively through r presentatives own choosing,' deemed illegalize feels intent Congress wrote 7(a); today; desirable interfere drastic way laws several States subject. 15 'But similar misconceptions bill, states code approved prescribed thereunder, closed-shop agreements employers employees. words, does facilitate them may illegal; status quo debatable subject leaves open might legally consummated *.' 11-12. 16 contains language: 17 practice, agreements, widely misrepresented. industry; give new All eliminate doubts misconstructions possible repetition providing organization, established, maintained, assisted action defined majority made. legalize committee confident desire enact general ban legal. should emphasized effected assented employer.' H.R.Rep.No. 17. H.R.Rep. 17, 19, 20. 18 major speech support Senator said: 19 'While outlawing interfered employer, even much-discussed closedshop confirmation workers.' 79 Cong.Rec. 7570. 20 went explain dispelling misunderstanding advocacy disapproval shop, then added: virulent encourages outrageous view fact respects actually narrows now-existing agreement.' Ibid. 22 Later, during discussion proposed amendments, answered floor words: 23 will change quo. wherever today can made, continue law. By situation.' Id. 7673. 24 Equally conclusive Representative Connery, manager House, statement Taber amendment entirely stricken prov so. charged 51% bring 49%. Connery 25 'Mr. Chairman, I rise opposition: proposition refer forbidding way.' 9726. 26 ruling entrusted adopted construction suggested, interpretation given supports petitioner's position. true, practical desirability settling wartime disputes security found contracts containing clauses despite authority, conclusion 'its direct parties abide case stems directly war powers Government.' Greenebaum Tanning Co., Lab. 527, 534.2 itself acknowledged supremacy decision suspending directing discharged Board. International Brotherhood Paper-Makers 66 (A.F.L.) v. 245 541, 806. When present entered, ceased exist, Exec. Order 9672, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, 964 note, Fed.Reg. 221, and, occasion being, necessity suppression come end.3 27 Since wholly unjustified, rejecting placed enactment, invoke principle cases concurrent commerce remains long manifested unambiguous supplanted. See, e.g., Sinnot Davenport, How. 227, 243; Missouri, K. T.R. Haber, 169 613, 488, 42 878. Nor need we, enacting did mean enlarge right security, consider contentions based Hill Florida ex rel. Watson, 325 538, 65 1373, 89 1782, guaranteeing guaranteed commonly bargaining. expresses Peace Act. margin,4 changes, none requiring modification conclusions reached corresponding phrase, reinforces conclusions; 'inconsistent Act.' These cession take place parallel provisions. Where overlap, State's unimpaired. reading contained: meet situations Bethlehem Steel New York 330 767, 67 1026, 92 1234. declined jurisdiction. 245, 80th 40; S.Minority Rep.No. 105, P. 2, 38. 30 Other clearer left pursue more restrictive matter Because forbids strictly regulates 14(b) included forestall exclusive. reads: 31 'Nothing construed authorizing execution application Territory Territorial law.' displace 'regulates' 'prohibit' there doubt means authorize 'application' contract, circumstances 'is prohibited' State, history S.Rep. 5—7; 9, 34, 40, 44; H.R.Conf.Rep. 510, 60; 3554, 3559, 4904, 6383—84, 6446; N.R. 3020, reported, 13. 33 forever ousted enjoin forbidden enumeration enforcing matters governed lost once character activities regulation changed certification. Certification, makes clear disputed. relationship concerned, amounts assertion policy, Board's 91 1234; La Crosse Telephone Corporation 379. Indeed, express disclaimer intention permission carry out itself, practically meaningless easily avoided. For application, obviously, concurrent; futile disclaim areas reach. 34 Meployment below enacted Congress, affirmed. 35 Affirmed. 36 RUTLEDGE MURPHY, concur result. 37 BLACK, whom DOUGLAS joins, dissenting. 38 just holds compel unearned wages required discharge. originally entered response irresistible Government. 559, these: 39 From 1938 1943 company almost constant wrangle. chief bone controversy throughout five-year period union's demand 'closed shop.' Petitioner resolutely fought ' pen took cause After hearing prominent phase, 1940 pending issues. N.L.R.B. 975, 980, 1002 Appeals, referring 'main stumbling block' union, enforce represented Cir., 121 F.2d 602, 606, 611. Thereafter, early 1942, appealed conduct election. Board; withdrew state board application; election; won, old renewed increased intensity. 40 settle dispute. collaboration Labor, put yield demands. informed maintenance 'would anyhow' since inclusion policy. Thus fired side powerful agencies, flee other. Neither offered safe sanctuary. weighing conflicting considerations, unreasonably scales tipped States' side. demands agency, Government seized operated plants.1 Furthermore, stopped work. best judgment, though contrary strong desires, finally yielded Government's terms. January 23, executed contained controversial automatic extension clause. extended automatically alleged place. apparently concedes valid compulsion. my seems questionable Court—a tribunal—to hold money penalty acting obedience validly compelled make.2 I. 41 Court's concession rests premise creating stemmed could, did, force contract. Lab.Rep. 527. But, says Court, exist dissolution 4, 1946, became possessed break holding discontinuance instantly empowered impair nullify supreme embodied reasons, agree. 1. termination accomplished Executive President, 9672. 221. indicates invalidation directions. A indicated. established Wage Stabilization As name indicates, exercise functions wage adversely affect economy. limited purposes enumerated vested 'powers, responsibilities While scope operation within narrow limits powers, creation negatives showed permit invalidate interests industrial peace. indicating presidential belief stabilization peace longer essential emergency period, Order, old, rested statutes implement congressional expressed 57 163, 1501 detract power. Kelly Washington, 58 87, 94, 82 3. recognized continued existence further powers. promulgated last basis Under foregoing agree authorized punish 43 2. President correctly assumed cessation hostilities beyond light Ludecke Watkins, 160, 166—170, 68 1429, 1432-1434. officially ended still existed May, employee's odd adequate permitting 1946 commands rooted me justified adopting case. court supported imposed concluding Lanor ultra vires. Its reasoning 'ended' 560, 1947. result here inexplicable considered wholesale federally serious conflicts relationships extremely strained due transition Woods Cloyd W. Miller 333 138, 144, 421, 424. 44 suppose carries provide (at power) obligations faithfully observed invulnerable attack. before declared, doubtless contingencies one. suggestion stretched enough intent. manifested, fair assume intended remain immune attack terminated obligated observe until according 45 exist. vitality original terms, interpreted controlling contract's creation. point impairment nullification stemming Even think without penalize ended. II. 46 apparent applied deprives substantial Act3 policies. rights protected 8(3);4 stand 'as obstacle accomplishment full objectives Congress.' 542, 1375, 1782; 775-776, 1031, 47 began against eleven years passage L bor During entire eleven-year generally unequivocal authorization type noticed 'frequent subjects negotiation employees,' strongly indicated refuse concerning them. Licorice 309 350, 360, 60 569, 575, 576, 84 799. Both efforts frustrate unions constituted violation accountable.5 forcing accept isolated haphazard forced pursuant thoroughly well-established Board.6 conciliation division duties June 25, U.S.C.Appendix, §§ 1501—1511, 1501—1511. both agencies conform government better able duty conforming interdepartmental established. consisted discuss questions problems relating exercised. Rep.N.L.R.B. 74 (1943). April, Little Companies' controversy, 325, inserted conclusion, see pp. 354—356, fell 1945, decisions contracts.7 most extensive involved occurred business, engaged case, very relied decided strenuous objection here, statute.8 override pointed that, request Boards p. 543 stated: satisfied emergency, designated enforced peacetime strike. vote subordinated 51 evidence passed accepted contracts. expressly leeway involved. 151, 164, 164. precluding same extent precluded law.9 significant indicate phase mere clarification 52 Thus, renewed, indications authorities commanded accept. There seemed why anticipate supposed recognized. record permitted renewal deprived reluctant incident 8(3). 53 Nevertheless, now, gives unanticipated interpretation. hether past persons know. know penalties pressed 54 shows leave bar reports comments lend contention. history, join interpreting clean slate. not. counter today. 8(3)10 reasonably susceptible Conciliation Division assented. And, out, guilty refusal supra 994, 998. finding 1940, controlling. late date, compulsion founded justifiable trap settled subjecting penal damages good faith reliance Hearst Publications, 322 111, 123, 64 851, 856, 857, 88 1170. 55 reverse judgment. 'Sec. 10. (a) empowered, hereinafter provided, person engaging (listed 8) exclusive, affected adjustment prevention agreement, otherwise.' Although 542—43, General Counsel, Lloyd Garrison, full-dress reviewed 541. ordering suitable stabilizing relations war.' ix, xxii. next mention Fairbanks, Morse 217; Vilter Mfg. 332. later cases, adhered Vanadium Corp., 527; Ingalls Iron Works 190; Cudahy Bros. 124. determination impact viewed Administration organized interpret Constitution interruption production. 9017, 1507 237. roles quite distinct illustrated First World outlawed 'yellow-dog' duration war, nullifying recent Hitchman Coal Coke Mitchell, 229, 65, 62 260, L.R.A. 1918C, 497, Ann.Cas. 1918B, 461. Smith Wesson Lab.Bd. Docket 273; Gregg, Harv.L.Rev. 39, 54. difference again Policies 1918 cont acts contain prohibiting use child labor, although Hammer Dagenhart, 247 251, 529, 1101, A.L.R. 649, 1918E, 724, invalidating child-labor provision, few weeks 6th Ann.Rep. Secretary 114 (1918); 7th 126 (1919); Standards (prepared undated). otherwise: cede industry (other mining, manufacturing, communications, transportation except predominantly local character) involve commerce, applicable received therewith.' dire consequences Montgomery Ward 150 369. vacated moot. 326 690, 140, 90 406. brought test legality seizure properties obey Board' order. Appeals upheld U.S.App.D.C. 200, 144 528; D.C., F.Supp. 408. trial 'penalty' 'equities' acted relieve 'retard employer's inclination future.' 561, 417, 423. warning others complaince Wisconsin. note 10, 597. Allen-Bradley 1111, Electrical Radio Machine Workers America Employ ment 315 740, 751, 820, 826, 86 1154. Reed Prince 118 874, 883; Peninsular Occidental S.S. 98 411, 414. 1944 negotiate members employed. practice. Matter Tempa Electric 56 1270, 1273. 994. example, Companies, 325; Cotton Mills Inc., 136. Douglas Aircraft (1945). below, 332; 27; St. Joe Paper 421. Giant Food Shopping Center, Inc. (1948), 77 (No. 133). justify issued. employer— '(3) unti 449,

Category: 9