Document: 400 U.S. 297 91 S.Ct. 402 27 L.Ed.2d 398 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,v.LOCAL 825, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO. BURNS AND ROE, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. LOCAL Nos. 40, 42. Argued Nov. 18, 1970. Decided Jan. 12, 1971. Syllabus A general contractor (Burns) subcontracted construction work to three companies, all of which employed operating engineers who belonged respondent union. That union, disputing the assignment by one subcontractors (White) an operation involving electric welding machine members another labor organization, advised Burns that respondent's on jobsite would strike unless bound itself and give jurisdiction over machines. The union went when employers refused accede its demands. After arbitrator, whom had referred matter, held there was no reason change disputed assignment, physically prevented machine. Thereafter unfair practices proceeding against brought. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found inducing subcontractors' employees force White assign violated § 8(b)(4)(D) Act, bars strikes for object 'forcing * any employer particular in a organization rather than *.' NLRB also applying economic pressure neutral 8(b)(4)(B), from exerting coercive or secondary where 'an thereof' is forcing him, inter alia, 'to cease doing business with other person.' On NLRB's petition enforcement, Court Appeals sustained finding but set aside 8(b)(4)(B) finding, concluding union's objective use influence subcontractor subcontractor's conduct, not terminate their relationship.' Held: 1. In seeking bind project form job assignments implying demands have White's policy contract, engaged flagrant conduct within prohibition 8(b)(4)(B). Pp. 302—305. 2. Section exclusive remedy aimed at jurisdictional dispute made primary employer. 305—306. 410 F.2d 5, reversed remanded. 1 Arnold Ordman, Washington, D.C., Board. 2 Vincent J. Apruzzese, Springfield, N.J., petitioners, Roe, Inc., others. 3 Earl S. Aronson respondent, Local International Union Operating Engineers, AFL—CIO. 4 Laurence Gold, American Federation Congress Industrial Organizations, amicus curiae. 5 Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 6 this cause we are asked determine whether Engineers site nuclear power generator plant Oyster Creek, New Jersey, 8(b)(4)(B)1 Act. Although be violation section, enforce Board's order.2 We believe construed Act too narrowly. Accordingly, reverse remand case consideration propriety order. 7 project, & companies Construction Co., Chicago Bridge Iron Poirier McLane Corp. All were Engineers. But White, unlike Poirier, did collective-bargaining agreement 825. 8 latter part September 1965, installed assigned pushing buttons operated Ironworkers Union, perform actual welding. Upon learning 825's steward lead engineer threatened if given work. however, meet demand. 29, met manager Burns, contractor. They informed him 825 working voted signed binding3 as well giving equipment, including machines, jobsite. October 1, after demands, those walked off job. stayed out a.m. p.m., returning negotiations started. 9 6, submitted Joint Settlement Jurisdictional Disputes Industry.4 same day, stoppage contracts transferred engineers. again refused, project. This lasted 11. 10 20, notified parties accept resolution; started November 4, surrounded operation. 8, Regional Director obtained United States District temporary injunction under 10(l)5 restraining coercing cessation compel assignment.6 11 An practice subsequently ensued. 8(b)(4)(D)7 Bridge, take away it Appeals' approval questioned here. encouragement coercion approved issue 12 Congressional concern involvement third disputes own prompted focused 'secondary boycott,'8 conceived brought bear, 'upon alone party (to dispute), upon some has it'9 bring agree demands.10 13 is, product legislative compromise reflects protecting organizations' right exert legitimate dispute.11 activity protected even though may seriously affect parties. Steelworkers America, AFL—CIO (Carrier Corp.) NLRB, 376 492, 502, 84 899, 905, 863 (1964); 761, Electrical, Radio Machine Workers, (General Electric) 366 667, 673, 81 1285, 1289, 592 (1961). 14 Thus two threads require classified either 'primary' 'secondary.' And tapestry been woven classifying such among law's most intricate. See Brotherhood Railroad Trainmen Jacksonville Terminal 394 369, 89 1109, 22 344 (1969). here normally difficult task easy. As said, 'record amply justifies conclusion (Burns subcontractors) subjected threats walkouts, both.' F.2d, 9. And, clear designed achieve (the) work' 162 N.L.R.B. 1617, 1621. 15 directly involved dispute. these specific, overt purpose them put attempting apply full action directing efforts phases Burns' normal (Carrier) (1964), It instead using sort unmistakably flagrantly secondary. Denver Building Trades Council, 341 675, 71 943, 95 L.Ed. 1284 (1951). 16 more objectives neutrals 'cease business' requires. concluded relationship' enough. 10. court read statute requiring demand nothing short complete termination relationship between Such reading narrow. 17 Some disruption relationships necessary consequence purest activity. These foreseeable disruptions are, clearly protected. (Carrier), U.S., 496, S.Ct., 902; Electrical Workers Electric), 682, 1294. Likewise, could limited goal result be, while disruptive, so slight requirement met. 18 nor consequences slight. sought assignments. implication required contract. shut down whole If unable obtain consent, apparently willing continue disruptive knees. 19 Certainly, preferred capitulate demands; wanted machines Ironworkers. willing, try capitulation To hold serious effects prohibited largely ignore original congressional concern. Carpenters Dist. 407 804, 806 (CA5 1969). II 20 addition argument does cover argues provides remedy. Clearly, held, applicable. section 'the trapped claims' rival unions. Woodwork Mfrs. Assn. 386 612, 625, 87 1250, 1258 (1967). applies neutrals, basic different both sections indication intended application. III 21 Since applicable, consider portion order relating section. narrowly confined here; must cases further goals Communications 362 479, 80 838, 896 (1960); Express Publishing 312 426, 61 693, 85 930 (1941). Reversed 23 DOUGLAS, STEWART concurs, dissenting. 24 words what courts interpolated, lay alongside facts cause, I do see how can fairly say 'unfair practice' meaning get jobs workers. termed 'causing various jobsite,' ban since aim, 'a total cancellation constituted purpose. said: Respondent White.' 1621 1622. 25 Yet Trial Examiner found: 'Respondent never indicated job—it harass gain compliance requests. Nor White. work, substitution contractors contractual contractors.' 26 Our question turns findings fact law emerges, done induce 688, 951, 1284, effort force' position 'off job' satisfied test one. end, 501, A.F. L. 694, 700, 954, 957, 1299, means ban. 902, 863, employer, Carrier, ban, picketed entrance used exclusively railroad personnel providing freight service Carrier duration strike.' 28 plainly different. aim freeze close hour duration. merely whose controlled, therefore classic conflict covered makes organization' practice. 29 properly issued cease-and-desist concerning condemned 8(b)(4)(D). (D) necessarily mean (B) involved, 'mutually exclusive.' Plumbing Pipe Fitting Industry, 137 828, 832.* show only plan permanently day hour, should 8(b) (4)(B) satisfied; cannot element 'ceasing' present. Sec. 'It shall agents— '(4) (i) engage in, encourage individual person commerce industry affecting refusal course his employment use, manufacture, process, transport, otherwise handle goods, articles, materials, commodities services; (ii) threaten, coerce, restrain commerce, thereof is— '(B) using, selling, handling, transporting, dealing products producer, processor, manufacturer, person, recognize bargain representative certified provisions 9: Provided, contained clause make unlawful, picketing; *' Stat. 141, amended 73 542, U.S.C. 158(b)(4)(B). 5. proposed contract provided part: 'This Agreement Employer Agreement. Any sublets sublet subject terms conditions 'The agrees he will subcontract Collective Bargaining Agreement, subcontractor, said writing submit determination below.' private arbitrates industry. 160(l). Engineer's stop issuance injunction. struck 17, time ostensibly number operate recently electrical pump. representatives discussion walkout 'was less because being operation.' until December 21. Of like involve violations involved. See. otherwise, '(D) trade, craft, class class, failing conform certification determining bargaining performing work: 158(b)(4)(D). (4) (D). 386—390, 1119—1122, (1969); 624, 1257, 357 501 181 34, 37 (CA2 1950), aff'd, 1299 House Conference Report explained idea: 'Thus B. Similarly lawful boycott uses deals goods of, with, B.' H.R.Conf.Rep.No.510. 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 43 (1947). contains specific priviso, added 1959 amendment protects 'primary picketing' 'not unlawful.' n. supra. 145 1580; Millwrights 1102, 217.

Category: 6