Document: 389 U.S. 64 88 S.Ct. 201 19 L.Ed.2d 236 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSN., LOCAL 1291, Petitioner,v. PHILADELPHIA MARINE TRADE ASSOCIATION. Officers & Members, Petitioners, v. Nos. 34, 78. Argued Oct. 12, 16, 1967. Decided Nov. 6, Abraham E. Freedman, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioners. Francis A. Scanlan, respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 These cases arise from a series strikes along Philadelphia waterfront. The petitioner union, representing longshoremen involved in those strikes, had entered into collective bargaining agreement 1959 with respondent, an association employers Port Philadelphia. included provisions compensating who are told after they report duty that will not be needed until afternoon.1 union construed 'set-back' to mean that, at least some situations, whose employment was postponed because unfavorable weather conditions were entitled four hours' pay; interpreted guarantee no more than one hour's pay under such circumstances. 2 In April 1965, when this disagreement first became apparent, parties followed grievance procedure established by their contract and submitted matter arbitrator binding settlement.2 On June 11 ruled association's reading set-back correct.3 July, however, group members refused unload ship unless employer would promise having set back starting time 8 a.m. p.m. sought arbitrate matter, but viewed original arbitrator's decision as controlling instituted proceedings District Court enforce it. complaint alleged 'to abide terms Arbitrator's Award * resulting serious loss damage (the) Employer Philadelphia.' This refusal, charged, constituted 'a breach applicable current Collective Bargaining Agreement between P.M.T.A. Union.' concluded prayer 'that immediate hearing enter order enforcing Award, plaintiff may have other further relief justified.' 3 Before court could take any action, met union's demands men returned work. heard evidence 'put facts on record' case 'moot moment' decided simply 'keep hand judge (and) jurisdiction . (i)f anything arises.' A similar situation did fact arise—this September. Again, before act, work stoppage ended. nonetheless requested 4 'an make it perfectly clear (union) is required comply award we cannot operate port if going continually harassed Union taking position *.' 5 Counsel rejected characterization its position. He disputes July September distinguishable which occurred April, 11, resolving controversy, controlling.4 expressed these contentions decree, dated 15, requiring 'issued specifically enforced.' decree ordered said Award.' It contained command.5 6 When indicated issue counsel asked clarification: 7 'Mr. Freedman: Well, what does mean, Your Honor? 'The Court: That you determine, means. 9 I am asking. give my client advice don't know asking Honor tell me doesn't— 10 You handled case. about telling very frankly now means, proposed order. says, 'Enforcement award.' Now, just mean? arbitration interpretation specific *. how do it? over done with. new cases. changing foreclose them point again. 12 has acted. 13 won't means? 14 read English language do.' 15 Although expressly 'not seeking enjoin stoppages,' whether might effect: 16 Does engage strike or refuse picket? 17 about. result arbitration. 18 'I signed Anything else come us? know, leaving sky. say client. 20 Scanlan: No, nothing further, Honor. 21 closed.' 22 Thus, despite counsel's repeated requests, Judge steadfastly explain meaning 23 disrupted throughout late February 1966, issued rule show cause why officers should held contempt violating 15. Throughout March 1, without success determine precisely acts officers, violated court's 'We right know,' he said, 'what being accused comment.6 At points proceedings, appeared violation consisted during last few days February; times inquiry focused upon request meeting 28 discuss latest problem. 'Why,' asked, seek rearbitrate *?' As drew close, suggested yet another possibility—that officials Court's 'castigated' failed 'tell (the men) unauthorized' ward eight months earlier. '(I)n failing that,' 'they shown intend essence 24 Invited closing argument, said: 25 really address myself charged Are want invoke something else? 26 been shooting dark here now, trying guess 27 But evidently felt need explanation. After short recess, announced dock 'illegal circumstances,' 'violated therefore shall adjudged civil contempt.' extending holding 'the participated,' fined $100,000 per day, retroactive p.m., began, every day thereafter 'as long violated.' Appeals affirmed both subsequent order,7 granted certiorari consider questions presented two judgments.8 Much argument centered power 1965.9 maintains injunction against stoppages out Sinclair Refining Co. Atkinson, 370 195, 82 1328, 440, Norris-LaGuardia Act, federal even contains no-strike clause. association, hand, argues enforced award, Textile Workers America Lincoln Mills, 353 448, 77 912, 972, § 301 Labor Management Relations grant equitable arbitrate. strenuously argued applicability Mills us. We not, reach underlying labor law arguments present. For whatever possessed circumstances disclosed record, conclusion inescapable too vague sustained valid exercise judicial authority. 29 face, appears merely award. only abstract law, operative command capable 'enforcement.' noted difficulty sought, ascertain meaning, received response. Even 'comply (Arbitrator's) Award,' accordance express view walkouts circumstances.' 'illegal'—in sense violative agreement—even all, Local 174, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, etc. Lucas Flour Co., 369 95, 571, 593, record reveal 'circumstances' deemed relevant decree. Thus illuminated events, left entirely unclear demanded. 30 Rule 65(d) Federal Rules Civil Procedure designed prevent sort confusion clouded command. provides: 31 'Every granting restraining forth reasons issuance; terms; describe reasonable detail, reference document, act restrained; agents, servants, employees, attorneys, persons active concert participation receive actual notice personal service otherwise.' 32 Whether 'injunction' within compelling obedience threat 'order injunction' 65(d). Viewing 'specifically enforcing' alter conclusion. previously employed term 'mandatory arbitrate,10 there reason suppose concept narrowly. successor Clayton Act.11 Section intended 'of general application,' end '(d)efendants never forbidden *.'12 Consistent spirit purpose statutory predecessor, applied reviewing judgment National Board,13 courts appeals prohibitory injunctions enforcement orders affirmative decrees well.14 doubt, therefore, District's however characterized purposes, purposes 33 clearly rule, state 'specific terms' prohibited. error 'minor way decisional.'15 decisive. 34 potent weapon. founded understood, can deadly one. Congress responded danger frame so must obey intends require means forbid. Because framed, stand. And fall contempt. deal fully understands chooses ignore mandate. instead violate described unintelligible. most fundamental postulates our legal forbid imposition penalty disobeying defies comprehension. 35 Reversed. 36 BRENNAN, concurring result. 37 concur But, like Brother DOUGLAS, emphasize today's disposition implies determines Act carefully fashioned authorized final interpretations agreement. 38 part dissenting part. 39 reverse No. 78 No remand proceedings. 40 If 65(d), then fail see Act. Legal minds possess inventive genius great physical sciences. Perhaps form words worked emply science semantics distinguish problem present distinction; since feel strongly caused severe dislocation scheme disputes, think feet path well lead eventual reaffirmation principles My reserves question prohibited Despite qualification, once constitues 'injunction,' likely Sinclair, overruled, apply preclude issuance 41 failure parcel abuses aimed. Congress, fashioning encourage agreements agree refrain unilateral disruptive strike, respect arbitrable Hence, unions break impunity, congressional frustrated. itself remedies, commands hold contractual arbitration—the 'favored process settlement,' BRENNAN dissent U.S., 216, S.Ct., 1340. his accommodation all legislation books dealing relations. accommodiation railroad disputes. See Brotherhood Railroad Trainmen Chicago R. I.R. 30, 635, 622. With 301, 'Accommodation requires anti-injunction policy intrude areas, vital ends, where injunctive 301; unconditional surrender.' 225, 1344. 42 possible, course, instant cases, mandate repetition causes covered below 'refusal constitutes Respondent 'enter review here, refusal prohibiting action grievances provided Rather, but, allegations believed, totally frustrated refusing decision. Such 'heads win, tails lose,' attitude plays fast loose desire peaceful orderly settlement 43 acted good faith, dispute precipitated was, know. To visualizes necessary encouraging restrictions other, basic go precise findings obviously reversed. 228—229, 1346 (dissenting opinion). Article 9(a) 'Men Monday Sunday, inclusive, guaranteed (4) period 8:00 A.M. 12:00 Noon, regardless condition.' 9(h) 'If knocked off account inclement Ship's Master representative, paid guarantee, event knock themselves, worked, Agreement.' Memorandum Settlement, effective October 1964, 10(5) '(f)or commencing AM following holiday,' 'have non-arrival vessel cancel gangs 7:30 A.M.' 10(6) stated: 'Gangs start through Friday commence PM hour apply. morning period.' Settlement adopted reference, proviso conflict, Memorandum) prevail.' agreement, unchanged provided: 'All kind nature whatsoever arising involving paragraph 13(d) hereof, referred Grievance Committee, consist selected Employers Union. Should Committee unable resolve neither party Arbitrator, Joint Panel consisting three representatives Association interruptions limited necessity arbitration, effort resolved Committee. arose previous weeks, anticipated ensuing grievance, including matters contract, Impartial Arbitrator serve year panel five arbitrators American Arbitration Association. thus conduct hearings procedures Association, except obliged render forty-eight hours procedures. provide dispute, provision subject disputed interpretation, practice him. assist him determining become negotiation parties. There lock-out pendency while Panel, Arbitrator.' text this: contention Employer, Marine Trade hereby determination providing 'ordered PM, period,' invoked qualification. Union, International Longshoremen's above, port, denied.' regard twofold. maintained, first, factually identical 'quite past (any given) relates far future concerned.' contended, second, different crucial respect: later notified a.m., Memoramdum Settlement. own terms, dealt situations 'set a.m.' seemingly agreed independently issue. '(T)he factual issues brought up contract.' notification,' agreed, 'was stated method notification changed conceded arbitrator's) attention parties.' basis, adversary 'admitted stand goes beyond thought otherwise: 'You added mouth, dear boy, can't full 'ORDER—September 1965 'And Now Wit, 15th September, hearing, ordered, decreed defendant, defendant Award. 'By 'Ralph C. Body, J.' stoppage, 'beyond bound.' attempted prove went raised separate notice. Cf. n. 4, supra. comment aspect guilty 365 F.2d 295, 368 932. 386 907, 87 860, 782; 387 916, 2031, 968. Other well. light them. upheld in' mandatory carry arbitrate.' Id., 212, 1338. Stat. 738, U.S.C. 383 (1940 ed.). H.R.Rep. 627, 63d Cong., 2d Sess., (1914); S.Rep. 698, (1914). Regal Knitwear Board, 324 9, 13—15, 65 478, 480—482, 89 L.Ed. 661. e.g., Keystone F. Lines, 123 326, 330 (C.A.10th Cir.); NLRB Birdsall-Stockdale Motor 208 234, 237, 46 A.L.R.2d 587 Cunningham, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 70, 77—78, 269 517, 524—525. Brumby Metals, Inc. Bargen, 275 46, 48—50 (C.A.7th Miami Beach Savings Loan Assn. Callander, 256 410, 415 (C.A.5th Cir.). 301.

Category: 6