Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1449_d9eh.pdf
Page Number: 7

4 

GLACIER NORTHWEST, INC. v. TEAMSTERS 

Opinion of the Court 

decides that the conduct is not protected or prohibited [by
the  NLRA]  may  the  court  entertain  the  litigation.”  Ibid. 
“[W]hen properly invoked,” Garmon thus “tells us not just
what law applies (federal law, not state law)  but who ap-
plies it (the National Labor Relations Board, not the state
courts  or  federal  district  courts).”    Trollinger  v.  Tyson 
Foods, Inc., 370 F. 3d 602, 608 (CA6 2004). 

C 
We relay the facts as alleged in the complaint.  Glacier 
Northwest sells ready-mix concrete to customers in Wash-
ington State.  Each batch must be mixed to the customer’s 
specifications. 
raw 
ingredients—cement,  sand,  aggregate,  admixture,  and 
water—in  a  hopper,  it  transfers  the  resulting  concrete  to
one of its trucks for prompt delivery. 

After  Glacier 

combines 

the 

In this business, time is of the essence.  Concrete is highly
perishable—it  begins  to  harden  immediately  once  at  rest. 
Ready-mix trucks can preserve concrete in a rotating drum 
located on the back of the truck, but only for a limited time. 
If concrete remains in the rotating drum for too long, it will
harden and cause significant damage to the truck.  Worse 
still, the hardening begins right away if the drum stops re-
volving.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union 
No. 174 (Union) serves as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative  for  Glacier’s  truck  drivers.    After  the  collective-
bargaining agreement between Glacier and the Union ex-
pired in the summer of 2017, the parties negotiated in an
attempt to reach a new deal.  Things did not go smoothly. 

—————— 
“where the regulated conduct touche[s] interests so deeply rooted in local 
feeling  and  responsibility  that,  in  the  absence  of  compelling  congres-
sional  direction,”  a  court  cannot  conclude  that  Congress  “deprived  the 
States of the power to act.”  Id., at 244.  Because we conclude that the 
NLRA  does  not  arguably  protect  the  Union’s  conduct,  we  need  not  ad-
dress these exceptions.