Document: 379 U.S. 650 85 S.Ct. 614 13 L.Ed.2d 580 REPUBLIC STEEL CORPORATION, Petitioner,v.Charlie MADDOX. No. 43. Argued Nov. 18, 1964. Decided Jan. 25, 1965. Samuel H. Burr, Birmingham, Ala., for petitioner. Richard L. Jones, respondent. Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Respondent Maddox brought suit in an Alabama state court against his employer, Republic Steel Corporation, severance pay amounting to $694.08, allegedly owed him under terms collective bargaining agreement existing between and Maddox' union. had been laid off December 1953. The called if lay-off was result a decision close mine, at which worked, 'permanently.'1 also contained three-step grievance procedure be followed by binding arbitration,2 but made no effort utilize this mode redress. Instead, August 1956, he sued breach contract. At all times material claim, engaged interstate commerce within meaning Labor Management Relations Act,3 Republic's industrial relations with union were subject provisions that Act. 2 case tried on stipulated facts without jury. Judgment awarded favor Maddox, appellate courts affirmed theory law applies suits since, employment relationship necessarily ended, further danger strife exists warranting application federal labor law.4 Moore v. Illinois Central R. Co., 312 630, 61 754, L.Ed. 1089 (1941), Transcontinental & Western Air, Inc. Koppal, 345 653, 73 906, 97 1325 (1953), cases decided Railway Act,5 cited support proposition. Furthermore, it held not required exhaust contract procedures. We granted petition certiorari, 377 904, 84 1168, 12 175, determine whether rationale Co. carries over § 301(a) Act.6 conclude judgment must reversed. I. 3 As general rule applies, policy requires individual employees wishing assert grievances attempt use agreed upon employer as redress.7 If refuses press or only perfunctorily presses individual's differences may arise forms redress then available. See Humphrey Moore, 375 335, 363, 11 370; National Board Miranda Fuel Cir., 326 F.2d 172.8 But unless provides otherwise,9 there can doubt employee afford opportunity act behalf. Congress has expressly approved procedures preferred method settling disputes stabilizing 'common law' plant. LMRA 203(d), 29 U.S.C. 173(d); 201(c), 171(c) (1958 ed.). Union interest prosecuting is clear. Such activity complements union's status exclusive representative permitting participate actively continuing administration In addition, conscientious handling claims will enhance prestige employees. Employer interests, their part, are served limiting choice remedies available aggrieved And cannot said normal situation, inadequate protect interests until attempted implement found them so. 4 A contrary would permit completely sidestep lawsuit little commend it. addition cutting across already mentioned, deprive ability establish uniform orderly settlement grievances. exclusive, loses much its desirability settlement. creating such situation 'would inevitably exert disruptive influence both negotiation agreements.' Local 174, Teamsters etc. Lucas-Flour 369 95, 103, 82 571, 577, 7 593. II. 5 Once established discussed above general, should next inquired specific type here question—one relating pay—is so different kind justify exception. supra, put forward proposition is. 6 Court ruled trainman Act administrative before bringing wrongful discharge. Black, Court, based permissive language Act—disputes 'may referred * Adjustment *.'10 Black wrote again Slocum Delaware, W.R. 339 239, 70 94 795 (1950), declaratory railroad company two unions resolve representation dispute. jurisdiction exclusive. distinguished thus: 'Moore discharged railroad. He could have challenged validity discharge Board, seeking reinstatement back pay. Instead chose accept railroad's action discharging final, thereby ceasing employee, claiming damages we held, does bar from adjudicating cases. common-law statutory differs any remedy power provide, involve questions future other employees.' 244, 580. 8 This distinction confirmed supra: 9 'Such (a wrongfully discharged) proceed either accordance prescribed resort alleged unlawful recognize claim. Where applicable permits recovery showing prior exhaustion remedies, recover, did litigation, Mississippi law.'11 661, 910. 10 Federal Koppal diversity; thought apply merely reason fact agreements Since time clear substantive covered 204 Act, International Assn. Machinists Airlines, Inc., 372 682, 83 956, 67, LMRA, Textile Workers America Lincoln Mills, 353 448, 77 912, 972. Thus major underpinning continued field more importantly present context, extension removed. hold incompatible precepts Mills accepted. Grievances depending critically unlike types Although true asserting claim accepted follow resolution effect Severance governing obvious concern employees, potential cause dispute long maintains relationship. Only represented remain employed, final permanent plant shutdown, possibility work stoppage resulting severance-pay even narrow require procedures, inability stage agree arbitration shutdown situations inhibiting reaching agreement. permitted circumstances recourse limit modes used do eliminating claims. hardly elimination, comprehensive protection those represents, interpretations contract, arbitrator rather than decide determined 'close permanently.'12 There are, then, positive reasons why govern others. appear apply. 'Comprehensiveness inherent process formulated mandate Mills,' 'the matter 301 (a) 'is peculiarly one calls law." Lucas Flour U.S., S.Ct., 576. simply sought, award differ provide. governs 'Suits violation contracts organization representing industry affecting defined chapter *.'13 Section 185(a) ed.), supra. clearly falls statute principles because see exception, applies.14 III. course preclude parties remedy.15 section provides, inter alia: 14 'It purpose provide prompt, equitable adjustment claimed It understood otherwise specifically specified elsewhere Agreement considered hereunder filed thirty days after date events shall existed occurred. 15 'Any Employee who complaint discuss Foreman settle Any settled constitute Section, 'Adjustment Grievances'. 16 'Grievances handled following manner: 17 'STEP 1. Between Employee, Grievance Committeeman Assistant Foreman.' 18 grievance-committee steps capped matters satisfactorily initial steps. 19 stating discuss' foreman susceptible variout interpretations; most likely may, chooses, speak himself committeeman formally embarking Step Use 'may' itself reveal understanding contracting free avoid limitations judicial suit. doubts resolved interpretation. United Steelworkers Warrior Gulf Navigation 363 574, 80 1347, 1409; Belk Allied Aviation Service 315 513, cert. denied, 847, 102, 74. 20 Finally, suggests possible make procedure, first step discussion 30 foreman, mine permanently closed indeed, kind. casuistic reading vanish; unlikely broke down event, us facts; neither nor pleadings suggestion availed instead waiting nearly three years 21 Reversed. 22 BLACK, dissenting. 23 ordinary, common, run-of-the-mill respondent Charlie iron miner employed petitioner Steel, recover $694.08 wages him. amount due workers provided 'permanently' continue paid regular number weeks down, lost job, nevertheless refused obligated To collect money hired lawyer went court. trial (the due, any) Supreme State affirmed. now reverses. holds union, 'grievances,' deprived right hire own sue balance due,1 left set out contract: long, involved controlled compulsory arbitration, hands officials lawyers wants handle not. 24 thus deciding own, somehow decided, expand apparently kinds include wage claims, depriving laborers themselves, today's interprets way revolutionary. Yet disposes easily reach conclusion plus equal 4. First says laborer 'contract grievance' bound several stages company-union meetings, negotiations, etc.,2 submitting 'appointed mutual agreement' company. Next labels 'grievance'—and, deny unhappy about company's failure what promised. Finally citing authority lays flat contractual claim—or 'grievance,' prefers call it—an laborer, though longer time-consuming, discouraging road union-company including having represent still good graces. Court's logic leads irresistibly (although yet occasion say so) unpaid while working, either, wait processes through interminable 'grievance procedure' turns arbitrator, whom want. Employees denied hearing ancient try simple breach-of-contract taken away away, Congress, I think, Today's holding my unprecedented, brainchild recent consistently expressed preference litigation cases4 accommodating wishes employers things desires workers. believe passed justifies inference barred like one, since am sure constitutionally could, impossible me concur decision. 25 think crucial flaw logical presentation treats same different. 'Grievance' word many meanings contexts, uses discrimination among them. 'grievance' generally signifies something happened unsatisfactory connection work. Failure serious widespread sometimes tensions, strikes violence, often disrupting peace doing irreparable harm economy Nation. order prevent disastrous results public, come semi-public controversies, nature struggles giants ordinary justiciable controversies involving laborers.5 When affected lead strikes, sides—company union—had peaceful settlement, honor enforce bind themselves arbitrate importance members vitally threatening public welfare far cry saying, today, whose discharges fails past-due substitutes must, grievances, doors country shut face suing get real active working conditions; controversy conditions wages. 26 For individual, professional jury difference. Arbitration proceedings ways: guaranteed Seventh Amendment; arbitrators need instructed law; they rules evidence; give awards; witnesses sworn; record complete; review, extremely limited.6 providing freely willingly contractural might later surely transparent cruel fiction. truth regarded thing, recently individuals access comparatively standardless arbitration. An insurance insured future, said, 'an oust excluding assured remedy.' Riddlesbarger Hartford Ins. Wall. 386, 391, 257. Cf. Insurance Morse, 445, 365. however, worker factory take sue, able overruled. Compare Moseley Electronic Missile Facilities, 374 167, 172—173, 1815, 1818, 818 (concurring opinion). nothing legislative history indicates congressional overrule rule. Moreover, arbitrate. 'Painly quid pro quo strike,' entire tenor no-strike agreement.'7 case, recognized reasoning 'not reach' bring claims.8 Forcing submit going promote peace. go street strike Corporation Merely when warfare heading violent clashes powerful unions.9 expanded surrender expansion run counter long-established preserving ancient, treasured trials independent according law. 27 past decisions closest it, broad conflicts reference vital genuine employer-union disputes. really point governed Act10 pursue 1325; 1089. While wrongful-discharge discharge, principle precisely here, pointed 579, 795, person almost never substantially remaining recognizes relevance and, declining raised overruling axe high falling just certain changing seasons. although alert counsel national familiar part enacted, fit disown express LMRA. 28 manifests great unions, not, fear, enough appreciation caught plight in. refers seeming approval "common plant,' directs attention employees' 'enhance (and agree) complicated procedural system dissatisfied compelled follow, ends up relieves lawsuit. expresses view allowing former State,11 'little it' grievances.' emphasize words 'employer' 'union' opinion, theirs seem chief focused. (employer union) want 'made exclusive,' else it.12 Individual some comfort, suppose, statement 'it so.' capable trying payment certainly interested be. particularly where job outside door looking hand push Examples wanting learn another felt prerequisite obtaining help all. See, e.g., Syres Oil Union, 350 892, 76 152, 100 785; Brotherhood Trainmen Howard, 343 768, 72 1022, 96 699; Tunstall Locomotive Firemen Enginemen, 323 210, 65 235, 89 187; Steele Louisville N.R. 192, 226, 173. But, attempting otherwise, 'afford behalf.' implies 'refuses claim,' form worker, dark take. allowed presented suffered inevitable discouragement delay accompanies refusal sort invoke wholly unable read laying restrictive burdens employee. difference Brethren concerning function interpreting formulating laws. also, vast philosophy role our country. least Magna Carta people desired institutional assurances fair unbiased controversies. Carta, English Bill Rights, charters liberty, originally English-speaking world deep desire standard, well-known presided judges jurors public. Because these deepseated desires, 'law land,' known 'due law,' became recognized. That written into Rights Constitution constitutions States. Chambers Florida, 309 227, 235—238, 60 472, 476—477, 716. Even true, concede, force man adjudicated law, i.e., constitutional safeguards trial, ever feel infer imply reads doubt. States ex rel. Toth Quarles, 11, 1, 8; Lovett, 328 303, 66 1073, 90 1252; Duncan Kahanamoku, 327 304, 606, 688; Reid Covert, 354 5—10, 1222, 1224—1227, 1148 (opinion announcing judgment); Barsky Regents, 347 442, 456, 74 650, 658, 98 829 (dissenting opinion); Stein New York, 346 156, 197, 1077, 1099, 1522 Shaughnessy Mezei, 206, 216, 625, 631, 956 Galloway States, 319 372, 396, 63 1090, 87 1458 controversy. arose, face. Nor member treated incompetent losses. becomes surrendered freedom liberty conduct Of worst servitude subjected, spirit blue lose rights appeal mistreated. Smith Evening News Assn., 371 195, 204—205, 267, 272, 246 affirm. dealing allowance relevant part: 'When, sole Company, decides discontinue department plant, substantial portion thereof terminate individuals, terminated directly entitled Company Agreement—Seniority Subsection C 14, hereinafter forth 14.' infra, p. 658. Stat. 136 (1947), amended, 141 et seq. 275 Ala. 685, 158 So.2d 492. 48 1185 (1934), 45 151 657. 196, n. (by implication); 74; Cox, Under Agreement, 69 Harv.L.Rev. 601, 647—648 (1956). proviso 9(a) 159(a) contra; Black-Clawson Ass'n etc., 313 179. eG., Summers, Collective Agreements Arbitration, 37 N.Y.U.L.Rev. 362 (1962); 601 (1956); Note, Protection Contracts, Yale L.J. 1215 (1964). pp. 657—658. 153(i) (but Bolton, 240 Miss. 126 524 (1961)). Missouri exhaustion. therefore lost. 'Between' 'contracts,' 'suits.' 200, 270, 246. By refusing extend suits, mean Consideration properly await various distinctive features appraised make-up scope review monetary awards, obtained 912. 'severance pay,' seen stated period follows: Grievances.' Foreman. 2. Superintendent representative. 3. Committee, Industrial Relations, Superintendent, representatives select. Accurate minutes meeting prepared five signed Company. appealed rendered writing herein, ten decision, basis last eligible appeal. 'If answered limits mutually upon, party notifying notation papers intent step. hereof reduced dated copies given Foreman, inserted appropriate place disposition sign same, returning copy Committeeman. 'The answer each respective processed step: Sundays Holidays; 2, seven days; 3, fifteen days. Except notice impartial Arbitrator appointed hereto requested final.' entirety chapter, organizations, district parties, respect regard citizenship parties.' 174 Teamsters, 593; Enterprise, Wheel Car Corp., 593, 1358, 1424; American Mfg. 564, 1343, 1403. 44 ed.) 'major' 'minor' Chicago I.R. 30, 635, 622. Bernhardt Polygraphic 198, 203, 273, 276, 199; Wilko Swan, 427, 436, 182, 187, 168. Independent Petroleum 324 903 (C.A.7th Cir.), equally divided 130, 271. 455, 917. Id., 459, 9, 919. Enterprise 1358; 1347; 1343. April 10, 1936, c. 166, makes aviation 49 1189, 181 one. Corp. 492; Woodward Iron Stringfellow, 271 596, 96. AFL—CIO amicus brief supporting case.

Category: 6