Document: 393 U.S. 357 89 S.Ct. 541 21 L.Ed.2d 546 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,v.Joseph T. STRONG, d/b/a Strong Roofing & Insulating Co. No. 61. Argued Dec. 10, 1968. Decided Jan. 15, 1969. Harris Weinstein, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles G. Bakaly, Jr., Los Angeles, Cal., respondent. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The Contractors Association Southern California, which respondent was then a member, negotiated collective bargaining contract with Roofers Union1 effective August 1963, establishing compensation levels employees member firms next four years. On 20, sought to withdraw from multiple employer association had this agreement. He refused repeated demands union that he sign contract. At length, filed unfair labor practice charges National Labor Relations Board, found respondent's refusal been on his behalf by violation §§ 8(a)(5) and (1) Act, 61 Stat. 140—141, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(5) (1). Board ordered contract, cease desist practices, post notices, '(p)ay appropriate source any fringe benefits provided in above-described contract.' 152 N.L.R.B. 9, 14 (1965). Court Appeals enforced Board's order except it required payment benefits. That part order, said, 'is an carry out provisions is beyond power Board.' 386 F.2d 929, 933 (1967). Government we granted certiorari holding. 391 933, 88 1849, 20 853 (1968). 2 Believing remedy well within its powers, reverse judgment Appeals. Section 10(c) Act empowers when adjudicates issue 'an requiring such person practice, take affirmative action including reinstatement or without back pay, will effectuate policies Act.' 147, § 160(c). This grant remedial broad one. It does not authorize punitive measures, but '(m)aking workers whole losses suffered account vindication public policy enforces.' Phelps Dodge Corp. v. NLRB, 313 177, 197, 845, 854, 85 L.Ed. 1271 (1941). Back pay one simpler more explicitly authorized remedies utilized attain end.2 3 Here failure acknowledge existence agreement concluded behalf. There no dispute withdrew too late escape binding force him, supplanting previous agreements same way.3 Nor, light obligation good faith reducing agreed terms writing, H. J. Heinz 311 514, 524—526, 320, 324—325, 309 (1941), argued practice. these respects now challenged. included direction would have paid signed thereby recognized legal obligations matured during process. than cases like plainly thorize. 4 challenge employer, brief, ordering infringe reserved inserts into enforcement agreement, contrary scheme statute.4 Admittedly, has plenary authority administer enforce contracts. Those are normally upon parties, usually through grievance arbitration procedures, ultimately courts. But business among other things, adjudicate practices. Its do so 'affected means adjustment prevention may be established law, otherwise * *.' 10(a), 146, 160(a). Hence, made clear some circumstances law overlapping, concurrent regimes, neither pre-empting other. NLRB C Plywood Corp., 385 421, 87 559, 17 486 (1967); Carey Westinghouse Electric 375 261, 268, 84 401, 407, 11 320 (1964); Smith Evening News Assn., 371 195, 197—198, 83 267, 268—269, 9 246 (1962); Local 174 Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen Helpers America Lucas Flour Co., 369 95, 101, n. 82 571, 575, 7 593 (1962). Arbitrators courts still principal sources interpretation,5 proscribe conduct even though also breach remediable also, if necessary interpret give effect 5 Bearing precisely case, expressly invited determine whether bargain violated resisting 'the execution written incorporating reached requested either party 8 (d), 142, 158(d); Boa d trespassing forbidden territory inquires negotiations produced honor, particularly recognize very providing insists. To extent affair, proper business. 6 Firing employee membership open arbitration, not, remedied under mandates Cf. Great Dane Trailers, Inc., 388 26, 1792, 18 1027 Mastro Plastics 350 270, 75 297, 99 714 (1956); Wallace 323 248, 65 238, 216 (1944). case before us little, any, different. act refusing Once adjudicated, could those singed duly reversed. ordered. Reversed. 10 BLACK concurs reversal Appeals' judgment, direct cause remanded submit accord DOUGLAS, dissenting. 12 surface logic what today: If award (which computed agreement), should allowed benefits, whose character amount determined An however, express legislative grant, authority,1 while not. is, course, complete answer, Congress did make exhaustive catalogue devices used thwart largely left relation policy.' See 194, 852, 1271. 13 What distinguishes present fact products computer arbitral process given strong support.2 Textile Workers Union Lincoln Mills, 353 448, 77 912, 972. provision sense competitive empowering p actice. indeed integral procedure sui generis resolving grievances arise. 15 were proposals, noted Dowd Box Courtney, 368 502, 510—511, 519, 524, 483, practive subject jurisdiction Board. proposals never gained support, deciding '(o)nce parties usual processes H.R. Conf. Rep. 510, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 42, quoted supra, at 511, 524. reflected 301 Management 1947, 452, 915. exchange arbitrate disputes no-strike Id., 455, 917. 16 Arbitration equipped qualified follow. who arbiters special qualifications particular industry come know common shop.3 agency branch government built-in impetus growth expansion. Seldom department restrict powers narrowly assume self-denying attitude. tendency construe broadly. organism grows subtle little-noticed extensions authority. students phenomenon predictable operation so-called 'laws.'4 Courts exception; their find easy seen early contest administrative agencies. United States Morgan, 307 183, 191, 59 795, 799, 1211. Recent examples exist field concerned here. We Steelworkers Warrior Gulf Nav. 363 574, 80 1347, 1409, how being enticed clauses permitting certain kinds becoming entangled process, arbiters, them. 585, 1354. relegated narrow field, leaving new expertise.5 19 arbiter course free 'to dispense own brand industrial justice' admonished reach fair solution problem' letter spirit Enterprise Wheel Car 593, 597, 1358, 1361, 1424. past practices contractual themselves, guidelines.6 77, American Federation Musicians, AFL—CIO Philadelphia Orchestra, 252 F.Supp. 787. moreover, contract; generalized code understood only "common shop implements furnishes context agreement." U.S., 580, S.Ct., 1351, 1409. sometimes called 'a cooperative effort arbitrator develop workable problem.'7 jaundiced view. Judge Hays, considerable experience stated: 'A proportion awards decided basis evidence considerations, way arbitrator's makes likely hired cases.' P. Arbitration: A Dissenting View 112 (1966).8 Whatever view taken, determining job computer. can hardly computations insertion order. 22 'common law' show covering 'past practices' might reflect award, solution' problem seem frame reference, knows. These matters chosen alien system envisioned Mills. 36, Slate, Tile Composition Roofers, Damp Waterproof Association. generally Nathanson 344 25, 29—30, 73 80, 83, 97 23 (1952); Note, Survey Remedies, 54 Va.L.Rev. 38, 41—95 Respondent president Association, thus familiar bylaw 'labor Committee shall Regular Members separately collectively payments question here constitute irrelevant our case. Whether employees, contributed them trust funds form higher dues, they passed straight funds, final result same. And just much interest 'effectuat(ing) Act,' making whole, require Trilogy, 564, 1343, 1403, 1424 (1960). judicial 156, 185, lieu proposal itself H.R.Conf.Rep.No. 41—42. House Conference Report asserts Board,' id., 42. 915, 972 (1957). LMRA 201, 152, 171. Sec. authorizes finds See, e.g., Aaron, 'On First Looking Mills Decision,' Law (Proceedings, Academy Arbitrators) (J. McKelvey ed. 1959); Bickel Wellington, Legislative Purpose Judicial Process: Case, 71 Harv.L.Rev. (1957); Bunn, Jurisdiction Enforce Collective Bargaining Agreements, 43 1247 Cox, Reflections Upon Arbitration, 72 1482 (1959); Legal Nature 57 Mich.L.Rev. (1958); Feinsinger, Enforcement Agreements—A New Era In Bargaining, Val.L.Rev. 1261 Gregory, Agreement, 635 Jenkins, Impact U.C.L.A.L.Rev. 355 (1959). Christensen, 301, 37 N.Y.U.L.Rev. 411 Kovarsky, Federal Pre-emption: Overruling Black Cutter Laboratories, 47 Minn.L.Rev. 531 (1963); Jones, Emerging Grievance Judges, Arbitrators, Parties, 52 831 (1966); Supreme Dispute Law, 63 751 (1965); Comment, Common Wine Old Bottles?, 58 Nw.U.L.Rev. 494 (1963). C. N. Parkinson, Parkinson's Courts: Aftermath 360 Davey, Musings Arbitrator, 36 Notre Dame Law. 138 (1961); Fleming, Some Observations Contract Grievances Before Stan.L.Rev. 595 Agreements 48 883 Name Game Decision—Some 'Arbitrability' 'Authority' 46 Texas L.Rev. 865 (1968); Mayer, Relations, 1961: Cases Re-examined, Lab.L.J. 213 Meltzer, Court, Arbitrability 28 U.Chi.L.Rev. 464 Jones Smith, Appraisals Criticisms Comments, 62 1115 (1964). Treece, Past Practice Relationship Specific Language Disputes, 40 U.Colo.L.Rev. 358, et seq. Domke, 545 1245 Intervention 41, 55 see Ruminations About Idealogy, 34

Category: 6