Document: 376 U.S. 473 84 S.Ct. 894 11 L.Ed.2d 849 Harold A. BOIRE, Regional Director, Twelfth Region, National Labor Relations Board, Petitioner,v.The GREYHOUND CORPORATION. No. 77. Argued Feb. 17, 1964. Decided March 23, Norton J. Come, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Warren E. Hall, Jr., Bartow, Fla., respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The Amalgamated Association Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees America, AFL-CIO (the Union) filed an amended petition with Board pursuant to § 9(c) Act,1 requesting a representation election among porters, janitors maids working at four Florida bus terminals operated by respondent (Greyhound). designated 'employer' employees sought be represented as Greyhound Floors, Inc. latter, corporation engaged in business providing cleaning, maintenance similar services various customers Florida, had contracted provide such question. 2 At hearing on petition, Union contended alternatively that unit requested was appropriate residual all unrepresented terminals—on ground least joint employer Floors employees—or because comprised homogeneous, distinct group. claimed latter sole employees, bargaining should therefore encompass Floors' either cities which are located, or separate groups. 3 found while hired, paid, disciplined, transferred, promoted discharged took part setting up work schedules, determining number required meet those directing also supervisors visited only irregularly—on occasion not appearing much two days time—and one instance prompted discharge employee whom it regarded unsatisfactory. On this basis, member dissenting, concluded were employers, they exercised common control over consisting under relationship hold election. thereupon directed determine whether desired Union. 4 Shortly before schedule take place, suit United States District Court Southern seeking set aside decision enjoin pending After hearing, court entered order permanently restraining 205 F.Supp. 686. Concluding jurisdiction basis Court's Leedom v. Kyne, 358 184, 79 180, 210, held merits Board's findings insufficient matter law establish relationship, established, law, question, violated Act attempting conduct where no employment existed between purported employer. Appeals affirmed, 309 F.2d 397, we granted certiorari consider seemingly important question federal labor law. 372 964, 83 1090, 10 128. We reverse judgment Appeals. 5 Both parties agree normal course events orders certification proceedings directly reviewable courts. This long ago American Federation 308 401, 60 300, L.Ed. 347, 'final order(s)' made §§ 10(e) (f)2 Courts do include decisions proceedings. Such decisions, rather, normally dispute concerning correctness eventuates finding unfair practice has been committed as, example, refuses bargain certified representative inappropriate unit. In case, 9(d) makes full provision judicial review underlying 'such record investigation shall included transcript entire filed' Appeals.3 6 That indirect method obtaining imposes significant delays upon attempts challenge validity obvious. But is equally obvious Congress explicitly intended impose precisely delays. time original passage 1935, House Report clearly delineated congressional policy underlay restriction provided 9(d): 7 'When organization built its membership point entitled recognized collective bargaining, accord recognition, union, unless can promptly choice representation, runs risk impairment strength attrition delay case dragging through courts, else forced call strike achieve recognition own economic power. strikes have called when review.'4 8 And both House5 Senate Reports6 spelled out thesis, repeated floor, purpose s 'for courts after ordered something predicated results election.'7 Congressional determination restrict situations reaffirmed 1947, Taft-Hartley amendments consideration, conference committee rejected amendment would permitted any interested person obtain immediately certification8 because, Senator Taft noted, permit dilatory tactics proceedings.'9 9 light clear import history, consistently refused allow direct supra. cases, however, each characterized extraordinary circumstances, our district despite injunction 9(b)(1) 'the (1) decide * if includes professional who majority vote inclusion unit,' Board—without polling approved containing types employees. conceded 'had acted excess powers thereby worked injury statutory rights employees.' U.S., 187, S.Ct., 183, 210. pointed there 'not 'review,' sense term used Act, within jurisdiction. Rather down delegated contrary specific prohibition Act.' 188, Upon these grounds affirmed 'attempted exercise (a) power specifically withheld.' 189, McCulloch Sociedad Nacional de Marineras Honduras, 10, 671, 547, upheld situation involving application laws foreign-flag ships their crews, careful note presence public questions particularly high scale national interest international complexion uniquely compelling justification prompt resolution controversy No remotely comparable urgency involved purely domestic adversary sit ation. exception today taken enlargement Kyne.' 675, 547. claim akin Nacional. argument is, present falls narrow limits held. points excluded independent contractor from definition 'employee' 2(3) Act.10 It said transferred therefore, plainly Congress. argument, think, misconceives substantive painstakingly procedural boundaries Kyne. Whether Greyhound, held, possessed sufficient qualify unaffected possible status contractor, since never suggested themselves occupy status. indicia essentially factual issue, unlike depended solely construction statute. Kyne one, extended plenary whenever erroneous assessment particular facts led conclusion does comport Judicial limited appeals, then conditions laid Act. 12 Accordingly, reversed remanded further consistent opinion. so ordered. 13 Judgment remanded. 14 DOUGLAS dissents. Section 29 U.S.C. 159(c), provides pertinent part: '(1) Whenever filed, accordance regulations may prescribed Board— '(A) group individual acting behalf alleging substantial (i) wish declines recognize defined subsection section, (ii) assert organization, being currently representative, longer section; '(B) employer, more individuals organizations presented him investigate reasonable cause believe affecting commerce exists due notice. conducted officer regional office, make recommendations respect thereto. If finds exists, secret ballot certify thereof.' amended, 160, '(e) appeals States, b vacation, circuit district, respectively, wherein occurred resides transacts business, enforcement temporary relief order, file proceedings, section 2112 Title 28. '(f) Any aggrieved final granting denying whole alleged Columbia, filing written praying modified aside.' 159(d), 'Whenever (c) based following (e) (f) *, decree enforcing, modifying, pleadings, testimony, forth transcript.' H.R.Rep. 972, 74th Cong., 1st Sess., 5. '* bill prior holding election, exclusive, complete, adequate remedy 10(c) other 9(c). safeguard opportunity heard. Since (f), actions determinations fact regard thereto will subject same sections 10(b) 10(c).' 20—21. 'Section absolutely right anterior An mere preliminary fact, itself effect employers There reason than hearing. subsequently collectively elected representatives, procedure becomes based, fully party Federal manner 10. scope action purposes complete guarantee against arbitrary Board.' S.Rep. 573, 14. Cong.Rec. 7658. See 245, 80th 43; 510, 56—57; U.S.Code Service p. 1135. 93 6444. 152(3). overrule Hearst Publications, 322 111, 64 851, 88 1170. 18.

Category: 6