Document: 373 U.S. 33 83 S.Ct. 1059 10 L.Ed.2d 172 BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS et al., Petitioners,v.LOUISVILLE AND NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY. No. 94. Argued Feb. 21, 1963. Decided April 29, Harold C. Heiss, Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioners. John P. Sandidge, Louisville, Ky., respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The respondent railroad company dismissed an employee named Humphries on ground that he had assaulted two fellow employees. His union, Brotherhood Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, protested discharge. customary grievance procedures property were invoked, but to no avail. To enforce its demand be reinstated, union threatened call a strike. Before strike was actually called, submitted dispute National Railroad Adjustment Board, pursuant § 3 First (i) Railway Labor Act.1 Board sustained employee's claim reinstatement in following brief order: 2 'Claim with pay time lost as rule is construed property.' reinstated Humphries, and, purpose computing his time, it asked him submit record outside income earned during period which followed dismissal. resisted this information, claiming Board's award entitled full lost, without deduction income. 4 Several conferences called discuss dispute. When refused accede union's interpretation award's lost-time provision, again forestall impending work stoppage, twice petitioned resolve amount due under award, asking first clarification earlier order then submitting disputed issue resolution separate de novo proceeding. entertain either petition, stating second 'The matter must judged res judicata' light original decision dealing controversy. 5 After set definite deadline. brought present lawsuit Federal District Court, requesting injunctive relief against proceedings completed, court issued injunction, holding Act could not legally enforcing money instead utilize judicial enforcement procedure provided by (p) Act.2 190 F. Supp. 829. Court Appeals Sixth Circuit affirmed, 297 F.2d 608, we granted certiorari consider obviously substantial question affecting administration Act. 370 908, 82 1255, 8 403. For reasons stated opinion, conclude correctly decided issues presented, accordingly affirm judgment before us. 6 statute governing central case Act, covering so-called 'minor disputes.'3 provisions added 1934.4 historical background these has been described at length previous opinions See Elgin, J. & E.R. Co. v. Burley, 325 711, 65 1282, 89 L.Ed. 1886; R. Trainmen Chicago I.R. Co., 353 30, 77 635, 622; Union Pacific Price, 360 601, 79 1351, 1460. As explained detail those opinions, 1934 amendments enacted because scheme voluntary arbitration contained Act5 proved incapable achieving peaceful settlements disputes. arrive more efficacious solution, Congress, behest several interests involved, settled upon new detailed comprehensive statutory procedure. 7 Subsections (a) (h) create define composition duties.6 Subsection provides shall duty both carrier negotiate concerning all minor disputes arise; failing adjustment means, 'the may referred petition parties or party appropriate division * *.'7 (l) directs appointment neutral referee sit event regular members are evently divided.8 (m) makes awards 'final binding dispute, except insofar they contain award.' It further if should arise over meaning.9 And finally, subsections (o) describe manner enforced, providing issuance itself action such orders.10 decisions interpreting have made clear mandatory, exclusive, system resolving right one place consent other, firmly established. R.R. U.S., 34, S.Ct., 637. other defeat resorting some forum. Thus, Order Ry. Conductors America Southern 339 255, 70 585, 94 811, held state take jurisdiction employer's declaratory subject First, because, 'if choose would deprived privilege conferred 3, after negotiations failed 'either party' refer Board.' Id., 256—257, 586. Slocum Delaware, L. W.R. 239, 577, 795. Similarly, barred from choosing another forum litigate claims arising collective agreement. Pennsylvania Day, 548, 552—553, 1322, 1324—1325, 1422. A corollary view principle process through cannot challenged collaterally methods review statute. In 1460, resort common law wrongful discharge same rejected merits proceeding Board. based conclusion that, when remedies intended Congress complete final means settling 616—617, 1359. also, Washington Terminal v.Boswell, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 124 235 (per Rutledge, J.), aff'd equally divided court, 319 732, 63 1430, 87 1694. 9 Of even particularized relevance now us Court's supra. There grievances (i). submission, demands. violated making compulsory parties. reviewed legislative history amendments, concluded entirely supported plain import language—that substitute economic self-help, merely alternative it. reason, Norris-LaGuardia LaGuardia 29 U.S.C. §§ 101—115, bar strikes support Board.11 pattern evaluate petitioners' wrong enjoining claim, simply stated, power injunctions recognized River limited situations Once favorable rendered, say petitioners, becomes free will—by invoking (p), force. strike, argued, necessary achieve congressional policy requiring carriers their employees settle bargaining process.' 11 broad premise argument—that permit settlement interplay force—is squarely conflict basic teaching River. analysis historic there determined 'there general understanding between supporters opponents amendment considered field.' 39, 640. 12 narrower argument—that, least, permitted likewise untenable circumstances case. We do deal here non-money awards, binding' (m).12 only portion presently remains unsettled computations Humphries' 'time lost' wholly separable issue. This, then, clearly controversy 'money award,' binding.13 Instead, step process. If does comply it, authorizes bring award.14 'proceed respects civil suits,' findings regarded 'prima facie evidence' facts complaint. excused costs suit, addition, awarded attorney's fees prevails. total effect provide carefully designed reviewing will function any significant expense union. Boswell, 13 express provision special form subsection integral part Act's machinery. has, effect, decreed two-step step, findings, serving foundation second. Money means. allow self-help point violate direct command. withdraw expressly required follow. render parts totally meaningless. 14 therefore less disruptive explicit than enjoined Consequently, which, case, accommodating generalized apply equal force case.15 hold error issuing injunction. 15 Affirmed. 16 BLACK dissents. 17 GOLDBERG, whom DOUGLAS joins, dissenting. 18 This 622, holds excluded pending disputes' Though holds, today impliedly reads mean indeed, language taken having elected favor exclusive outlawed use stage dispute' consideration logic enforceable of, against, employer railroad, grievant federal courts. Given premises River, follow governed declared cases United Steelworkers American Mfg. 363 564, 80 1343, 1403, America, AFL-CIO Warrior Gulf 574, 1347, 1409, andUnited Enterprise, etc., Corp., 593, 1358, 1424, course, enforcement. International Ass'n Machinists, Central Airlines, 372 682, 956. 19 Here, however, unlike ended; moreover, nonmoney specifically statute, majority recognizes, different considerations treated differently itself. binding.' machinery Act—which inferentially suggests confined I declare so limited1 contemplates type applicable trial limitation, requires, fact constitute facie' evidence. Under circumstances, excluding 'compulsory arbitration' seems me application, nonfinal nonbinding antithesis scheme. 20 leads what anomalous result plainly never Congress. What expressed dicta Pac. apparently reinforced today's holding. said, though denying courts rationale 611, n. 10, 1357. claimant forbidden refuses abide thereby. holding, cites Price apparent approval supports dicta. today, appears filing denied finally bound neither independent suit (the Price2), nor, presumably, pressure, i.e., purport thrust holding), nor seek since literal applies claimant's favor. reason unsuccessful effective prevent prior cited therein, whose remedy recourse. 21 Such foreclosure losing objectionable disparate consequences obtaining who loses occurs, refuse comply, did here; forecloses avenues successful carrier, recalcitrance, can compel requires entire retrial court. During lengthy conclusion, left net result, therefore, claims, binding,' challenge, loses, sole employer, loses. apparently, completely foreclosed using most traditional weapon, believe unevenhanded application Nor believe, contemplated protection afforded being rescinded inadequate unfair declares created. 22 Absent willingness Board,3 reading admittedly contrary words semblance fairness situation interprets intent money-claim strike—while perhaps suspended proceedings—is available decides acquiesce. least leave balance carrier. 23 suggested way treat difference once made, distinguishable there, resorted not, election-of-remedy principles, relitigate afresh bringing independent, unrelated common-law forum.4 24 My ultimate view, Congress—whatever respect repealing binding—cannot fairly deemed repeal money-award cases, binding. uninstructive result; demonstrates focused problem raised, anomaly effects portends. Notwithstanding, read intending allowance injunction 'strips labor primary weapon substituting reasonable alternative.' 41, impute drastic indication unwarranted. 25 reach conclusions reluctantly is, general, salutary field labor-management relations contributes substantially industrial peace. Wholly apart questions desirability arbitration, results flowing would, terms, commendable, assuming normally cumbersome slow expedited efficacy efficiency typical private arbitrations essential success integral, machinery, will, increase already undue delay grievances.5 Moreover, nature requisite runs directly best treatment judicially accorded awards. See, e.g., supra, 596—599, 1360—1362. These latter themselves my here, standing alone determinations instance, by, properly committed to, They are, nonetheless, relevant factors appraising propriety wisdom construction estimate intention framers. 26 deference, respectfully dissent since, mandated holdings supported, much compelled, specific intent, creates additional exceptions protections fashion effects, imbalance, outright advantage, '(i) group growing out agreements rates pay, rules, working conditions, including unadjusted June 1934, handled usual up chief operating officer designated handle disputes; but, manner, statement supporting data bearing disputes.' 45 153 '(p) within limit order, petitioner, person benefit file States district resides located principal office operates, setting forth briefly causes relief, premises. proceed suits, prima evidence therein petitioner liable subsequent proceedings, unless accrue appeal, paid appropriation expenses States. prevail allowed fee, taxed collected suit. empowered, rules actions law, make enter judgment, writ mandamus otherwise, aside (p). doubt involves application' agreement note 622. 48 Stat. 1185, 1189 (1934). 44 578 (1926). (a)—(h). (l). '(m) divisions writing. copy furnished respective controversy, award. arises involving request interpret dispute.' (m). '(o) directed includes requirement payment money, sum day named.' (o). 2, '(The primarily) upsetting natural competing forces capital. Rep. channeled forces, matters railway labor, into processes compromise them. controversies, strips 40—41, 640—641. Cf. Manion Kansas City 927, 706, 722, invoked. Compare Sinclair Refining Atkinson, 195, 210—212, 1328, 1336—1337, 440. 9, 11, sense practical claims. contradictory wins, 'order, effective' require certain. direction appear exclusively complementary immediately succeeding section, 'within order.' (The notes ante, pp. 35, 37. also Interstate Commerce Comm., 337 426, 69 1410, 93 1451. fact, distinguished Moore Illinois 312 630, 61 754, 85 1089, very rationale. 609, 8, 1355. While handles disposes impressive number each year, backlog immense. 1962 fiscal 997 disposed 383 withdrawn. period, 1,873 docketed. 1,380 thus removed docket year still fell almost 500 short equalling filed. At end 6,461 1,679 heard. By comparison, 4,948 1958, 415 past five years come close maintaining equilibrium able dispose many docketed period. Twenty-eighth Annual Report Mediation ended 1962, 59, 86.

Category: 6