Document: 361 U.S. 477 80 S.Ct. 419 4 L.Ed.2d 454 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,v.INSURANCE AGENTS' INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO. No. 15. Argued Dec. 7, 8, 1959. Decided Feb. 23, 1960. Mr. Dominick L. Manoli, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Isaac N. Groner, respondent. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case presents an important issue scope National Labor Relations Board's authority under § 8(b)(3) Act,1 which provides that 'It shall be unfair labor practice a organization or its agents * to refuse bargain collectively with employer, provided it is representative his employees *.' The precise question whether Board may find union, confers employer desire reaching agreement on contract terms, has nevertheless refused collectively, thus violating provision, solely and simply because during negotiations seeks put economic pressure yield bargaining demands by sponsoring on-the-job conduct designed interfere carrying employer's business. 2 Since 1949 respondent Insurance Agents' International Union Prudential Company America have negotiated collective agreements covering district employed in 35 States District Columbia. principal duties agent are collect premiums solicit new business assigned locality known trade as 'debit.' He no fixed regular working hours except he must report at office two mornings week remain three deposit collections, prepare submit reports, attend meetings receive sales other instructions. paid commissions collections made policies written; only compensation weekly payment $4.50 intended primarily cover expenses. 3 In January 1956 union began negotiation replace expiring following March. Bargaining was carried continuously six months before terms were agreed upon July 17, 1956.2 It not questioned that, if stood alone, record would establish conferred good faith purpose contract. However, April 1956, filed charge refusal against union. based actions members outside conference room, occurring after old expired had announced February reached when expired, then participate 'Work Without Contract' program—which meant they engage certain planned, concerted activities harass company. 5 A complaint violation issued hearings concluded.3 developed evidence union's harassing tactics involved member such these: time business, (after writing resumed) comply company's reporting procedures; 'May Policyholders' Month Campaign'; late offices days scheduled them, refusing perform customary offices, instead engaging there 'sit-in-mornings,' 'doing what comes naturally' leaving noon group; absenting themselves from special conferences arranged company; picketing distributing leaflets various company specified directed union; each day policyholders others soliciting policyholders' signatures petitions presenting signed home while simultaneously mass demonstrations there. 6 hearing examiner recommending dismissed. noted so-called Personal Products case, Textile Workers Union, 108 N.L.R.B. 743, declared similar constitute prohibited bargain; but since order set aside Court Appeals Columbia Circuit, v. N.L.R.B., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 35, 227 F.2d 409, did consider bound follow it. 7 review adhered ruling rejected trial examiner's recommendation, entered cease-and-desist order, 119 768. Circuit also decision and, order. 104 218, 260 736. We granted petition certiorari presented. 358 944, 79 352, 351. 8 found nothing record, apart mentioned negotiations, could relied support inference fulfilled statutory duty; fact else General Counsel prosecuting complaint.4 analysis congressional design enacting duty led him conclude authorized economically constituted violation. answers flatly 'We do agree' proceeds say '* Respondent's reliance course avowed compelling capitulate antithesis reasoned discussion duty-bound follow. Indeed, clearly revealed unwillingness consideration table where argument, persuasion, free interchange views take place. circumstances, Respondent continued confer desirous concluding does alone obligation 769, 770—771. Thus view irrespective conferring per se 8(b)(3).5 Accordingly, said brief, 'The here down Act hold tactics, specifically forbid Section protect,6 finding failure required 8(b)(3).' 9 First. bill became Wagner included provision imposing either party collectively. Senator thought without provision.7 Senate Committee concluded desirable include making assure achieve primary objective requiring recognize selected their representative. believed rights guaranteed meaningful effort arrive agreement. Report: 10 'But, deliberation, committee this fifth should inserted bill. seems clear guarantee right through representatives own choosing mere delusion accompanied correlative part negotiate them bona fide Furthermore, procedure holding governmentally supervised elections determine choice becomes little worth election results all practical purposes ignored. Experience proved neither obedience law nor respect encouraged forth unaccompanied fulfillment. Such provokes constant strife, peace.' S.Rep. 573, 74th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 12. 11 nature imposed employers 8(5) original Act8 sweepingly conceived. Chairman declared: 'When chosen organization, representatives, proposes escort door say, 'Here are, legal your employees.' What happens behind those doors inquired into, seek inquire into it.'9 12 limitation implied last sentence been maintained—practically, hardly been—but underlying remark remained most basic provision. That effective management extend recognition essentially corollary Decisions reflect this. For example, unilateral wage increase processes tends subvert position matters nature, hence condemned violative See Crompton-Highland Mills, Inc., 337 217, 69 960, 93 L.Ed. 1320. And suggested, requirement bargaining, although so premised, necessarily beyond of, room. first annual 'Collective something more meeting employees; essential thing rather serious intent adjust differences reach acceptable common ground. repeatedly asserted ingredient bargaining.'10 standard early judicial approval, e.g., Griswold Mfg. Co., Cir., 106 713. Collective then, occasion purely formal between labor, maintains attitude 'take leave it'; presupposes ultimate agreement, enter Heinz Co. Board, 311 514, 61 320, 85 309. sort Congress, Act, wanted extended unions; process looked ordering parties' industrial relationship formation Local 24, Brotherhood Teamsters Oliver, 283, 295, 297, 304, 312. 13 But same time, Congress generally concerned substantive parties contracted. Cf. Terminal Railroad Ass'n Trainmen, 318 1, 6, 63 420, 423, 87 571. Obviously tension principle need any specific enforcement deal attempt resolve criticism application 'good-faith' test arose belief forcing avoid successful practice.11 Thus, 1947 fear expressed 'gone very far, guise determining bargained faith, setting itself up judge concessions make proposals counterproposals make.' H.R.Rep.No. 245, 80th 19. viewed agency exercise powers arbitrate solutions issues check apprehended trend good-faith 8(d) Act. section defines follows: 14 'For section, performance mutual meet reasonable times wages, hours, conditions employment, arising thereunder, execution written incorporating requested party, compel agree proposal require concession *.'12 15 problems positions taken violate continue arise amended. Truitt 351 149, 76 753, 100 1027; Wooster Division Borg-Warner Corp., 356 342, 349, 78 718, 722, 823. remains prevent controlling settling agreements. American Ins. 343 395, 404, 72 824, 829, 96 1027. 16 Second. At statutorily defining adding Taft-Hartley amendments, organizations. Unions obviously formed collectively; legislative history makes plain wary some unions, ensure approach willingness enjoined earlier. employee putting it' management. Cong.Rec. 4135, 4363, 5005.13 17 Third. apparent whole policy impose both sides promotes over-all achieving peace. Jones & Laughlin Steel 301 45, 57 615, 628, 81 893. Discussion conducted narrow issues, real clearer other, perhaps themselves, encourage settlement give take. mainstream cases courts reviewing orders, provisions fixing insuring attitude. conduct, wide latitude unrestricted governmental power regulate solution differences. supra, page 304. 18 believe case—unless can defended, 8(b)(3), resting unique character here—must proceeding erroneous bargaining. realized system Government control cannot equated academic search truth—or even might ideal one. parties—even granting modification come realization interdependence—still proceed contrary extent antagonistic viewpoints concepts self-interest. philosophic notion perfect understanding among people lead values. presence weapons reserve, actual parties, parcel Acts recognized. Abstract logical inconsistency command statute toward legitimacy use weapons, frequently having effect individual workers productive enterprises, induce one desired other. truth matter present stage our national relations policy, factors—necessity availability devices incline one's terms—exist side side. One writer recognizes describing force 'a prime motive bargaining.'14 Doubtless factor influences other; less apply areas controversy defined discussion; apt weak strong accordance degree possess. close student laws writes: curiously ambivalent today. aspect brute contest somewhat masked polite manners voluminous statistics. As relation matures, Lilliputian bonds opposing concentrations power; lack sanctions nonetheless contain power. Initially consequences disagreement turns facts, reason, sense responsibility, responsiveness government public opinion, moral principle; these forces generate compulsions, negotiating approaches informed persuasion.' Cox, Duty Bargain Good Faith, 71 Harv.L.Rev. 1401, 1409. 19 reasons, we think involves intrusion aspects process—again, unless warrant condemnation here. limitations exceeded, hold, inferring deficiencies reason attempted pressure, exert negotiations. bad summon aid. used considerable influence limited, directly Our presently erected foundation S.Rep.No. 105, 2. Nor charter act large equalizing disparities 20 Fourth. indicated, inconsistent faith. recent years, assumed label particular duty. case,15 aside, U.S.A.pp.D.C. 409;16 Boone County United Mine Workers, 117 1095, 103 207, 257 211;17 case. freely (and correctly) conceded 'total' strike called subjected least contract, no-strike clause, expired. supra. instant unequivocal therefore logical).18 light principles enunciated, evaluate claim power, distinguish brand ones bar foundation.19 21 (a) contends distinction total activity protected interference §§ 720 8(a)(1)21 activity. arguendo Board22 Court's Briggs-Stratton U.A.W., A.F. L., 232 Wisconsin Employers 336 516, 651, establishes activity.23 On assumption discharged appropriate disciplinary action participating 'slow-down,' 'sit-in,' arguably unprotected disloyal tactics. Fansteel Metallurgical 306 240, 59 490, 83 627; 1229, Intern. B. Electrical 346 464, 74 172, 98 195. surely mean constitutes why ordinary developed, suggests (on make) members' unprotected, discharged, deemed practices, remedy milder than discharges personnel disruptive commerce, available. argument persuasive. There logic assuming willing allow self-help face use, impliedly unlawful federal law. problem construing 8(b)(3)'s see how anything matter. 22 (b) orthodox 'traditional' being consistent 8(b)(3); 'normal,' viewed.24 Further, cites conceives public's again distinctions enjoins Again, relevant arguments given affirmative protection dispute grudging exception completely Act; basis, fail relevance time-honored supported opinion. deserve condemnation, justify attempting pour vessel it.25 contention activities, opposed 'normal' strike, offer maximum minimum cost doubt here,26 turn that. Surely minimize maximize disadvantage using them. catalog employer27 fall ban extensive.28 23 Fifth. These essayed here, inherent confirm us conclusion judgment Appeals, affirmed. moves area, support, functioning arbiter seeking gain acceptance demands. sought introduce properly 'balanced'29 justifiable unjustifiable, proper 'abusive'30 assertion allows sit every weapon employ, judging general drafted reference forms pressure. amounts entrance countenanced. 24 afforded flexibility determine, permissible not, party's evidences poses solution. Truck Drivers 353 87, 77 643, 676. specifically, way latter question, drawing inferences whole. quite another matter, however, picking branded unlawful. outlaw unions. 8(b)(4) added Stat. 141, supplemented Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure 1959, 73 542; (29 U.S.C. 158(b)(4)), 29 U.S.C.A. 158(b)(4); 8(b)(7), 544. never outlawed Congress.31 To sure, express prohibitions exclusive—if questions stratagem device evade powerless. Phelps Dodge Corp. 313 177, 194, 845, 852, 1271. needs add Act's 25 hesitation function responsibility conflicting interests recognized legislation. Clearly, 'ultimate balancing legitimate interests' remembered striking balance effectuate often difficult delicate committed subject limited review.' 96, 648. Certainly 'statute expressive broadly phrased carries task administrative application.' 852. sphere exclude actions. facts detailed delineation respective functions court area. resolution amounted left case-by-case adjudication, movement area regulation Where answer, will answer; sure asked. indication define permitted 'ideal' 'balanced' state 26 suggested reevaluation content contemplated Congress. demonstrated capacity Nation's legislation what, judgment, pattern developing country. Major revisions enacted greater stress role 'pure' disputes, eliminating grasp, start here; alternatives, shrink undertaking. Congress' yet moved point, lean on, own.32 27 Affirmed. 28 Separate FRANKFURTER, HARLAN WHITTAKER join. sweep far-reaching implications domain lawmaking nationwide importance compels separate statement my views. 30 underlies program admittedly initiated expiration March 19, 1956. work; decline, 'sitting-in' work according schedule; write or, it, fashion; decline meetings; demonstrate offices; behalf whom dealt. notice advance details out. 31 commenced June 5, alleging respondent's After hearing, Trial Examiner recommended dismissed, '(f)rom 'circumstantial evidence' (of mind) possible Union's . .'; 'whatever reasonably drawn concurrent 'unprotected' activities' sufficient outweigh 32 sustained exceptions Examiner's report, failed program. 'clearly table' want stated '(h) arassing plainly 'irreconcilable background balanced rest' outward gave rise mind out appeared sham: 33 '(T)he argues believes. most, demonstrates prepared go motions relying campaign disrupt Company's contractual demands.' 34 order1 cross-petitioned aside. exclusively prior 1955, denied held (one dissenting) 'harassing' 'There slightest genuine get kind wants.' 36, 410. different grounds examination bears genuineness proceedings. From drew inimical bargain. proceeded statute, regard bearing proof maintained 36 'could appropriately promoting peace defeated sanctioning resort form warfare technique.' Court, like disposes single broad stroke. concludes situation aim favorable entirely No evidentiary significance, allowed context. 37 I tenable. enforcing whether, context engaged sincere commands. further sustainable determination sham, insufficient giving must, benefit draw experience interpreting significance record. Universal Camera 340 474, 456, 95 456. done lay rule betokens 38 rests generalization 'the (because) bargaining.' justified proposition room play reveal strength weakness abstract 'economic pressure.' weighs reliable manifestation conducted. complex profitably reduced abstraction An exertion pressure' normal Vital varying mild persuasion destructive, albeit 'economic,' violence2 obscured phrase. 39 While contemplates pressure,' manner commands, precluded considering totality actor. deny allowable entrusted. past declined pre-empt proscriptions competence instance weigh raw fact. apparently innocent evidently sustain findings practice, 'may altered imponderable subtleties appraise' first, evidence. Virginia Elec. Power 314 469, 479, 62 344, 86 348. Activities isolation wholly innocent, lawful 'protected' ought finding, justifies isolated parts 'are together plan (to frustrate agreement). unlawful.' Swift States, 196 375, 396, 276, 279, 49 518. Aikens State Wisconsin, 195 206, 3, 154. 40 Moreover, exerting shelter isolation. Unlawful violence, person livelihood, secure offer, much withdrawal subjects condemns.3 romanticize community interest employees, unmindful conflict utilization circumstances signify traditional offend commanded statute. direction, expression governing viewpoint which, application, concrete, doctrinaire content. 41 main promotion unionism necessary instrument 'to laborers opportunity equality employer.' Chief Taft Foundries Tri-City Central Trades Council, 184, 209, 42 72, 78, 66 189. Equality capital conventional terminology predominant system, presupposition progressive enlargement give-and-take machinery within industry, substitute, language Brandeis, 'processes justice primitive method combat.' Duplex Printing Press Deering, 254 443, 488, 65 349 (dissenting). Promotion resulting progress rational gathering momentum quarter century. political thereby interpretations actively throws weight redress inequality fashion rules unions solidarity twenty-five years ago, basis unreality. Accretion carry increasing exercise. Therefore, unfolding field inexorable premise bellicose process. applied conceived core chief means great social furthered, discourage, more, combatants pressing available limits justification calls construction existing lays emphasis employ dominant respected declining postulate legally impermissible exertions restricted crudities force. 627. 43 short violence sustained. itself, previously construed amplified 8(d), substantial becoming, fears, merely 'an end unfavorable conduct. entire respondent, particularly table. charged participated sufficiency pass. 44 urges approved outlawry se, ascertainment mind. relies four cases: H. J. 309; 1320; F. W. Woolworth 352 938, 261, 235; position. proscription reduce equally well regarded integration hostile pages 525—526, 325. Decision premise. By deadlock non-statutory manifested intention withdraw rested approval changes employment bargain, others, instituted offered consulting Finally, summary disposition here.4 referred strongly indicating 45 undertaking considered isolation, independent law, reticulated scheme interlacing purposes. entirely, due interrelated provisions, applied. Lincoln 448, 912, 917, 972. pertinent restraint fair 'economic' 13:5 46 'Nothing herein, impede diminish affect qualifications right.' 47 501(2) Management definition 'strike':6 48 Act—* (2) term 'strike' includes stoppage (including collective-bargaining agreement) slowdown interruption operations clause plain, unqualified right, interference, 'strikes,' contends. Report7 dealing addition confirms approve elaboration nominally heretofore supra; Sands 332, 508, 682; Southern S.S. 316 31, 886, 1246. 'limitations qualifications' extinguish rule. proceed, claims do, occurs, limitations,8 rely grant enforce contained 8(b)(3). 13, 259, 524, account. divorcing finds undesirable, 50 permission embodied determining, violated 'specific' When emphasizes color illegitimacy imparted otherwise relevant. total, peaceful compliance requirements suffice conclusion; prolonged union-sponsored would. Here, many situations gradations, line abstract, speculative enterprise. await Board. experienced regarding severity specialized 51 amendments 1947, proscribe actor 1935 'practice bargaining' purposed 'encourage.' 1935, 449. definition, until evolved administration See, over objectify elements enacted. enactment restrain regulate, indirectly, 829. implicit Id., 832. 52 disputed employers, preserved assert undesirable Federal Trade Comm. Bunte Bros., 312 351—352, 580, 581—582, 881. 53 considerations govern Viewed compose Apart consider, manifest nuisance reality sham. appear stalled demands, pretence procedure. counsel Examiner, were, unnecessary. remanded evidence, be, 54 could, mind, 'traditional,' disapproval, who discharge, 55 vacated, proceedings (the Act), 158(b)(3), 158(b)(3). stenographic discussions kept, transcription fills volumes. recessed concentrate arrived Examining de novo precedent, besides themselves. forthcoming, commented, able 'objectively evaluate' 'impact' 'collective-bargaining negotiations' 'nature activities,' reluctant feat mental pole vaulting presumption pole.' 781—782. observed participation indicated 'was compaign 771. going 'motions' norm context, meant. 'pole vaulting' 'reluctant attempt.' note 4, assume deciding 492, 429, 22, infra. Hearings Education S.1958, 43: 'Therefore, difficulty precisely language, bill.' 453. corresponding current 8(a)(5), 158(a)(5), 158(a)(5). Walsh, 7660. N.L.R.B.Ann.Rep., pp. 85—86. related 142, 158(d), 158(d). Ellender explicit 4135. applicable identify financially exhaust employer. Hatch 5005. 15, closely Newspaper Publishers 193 782, 804—805, affirmed certiorari, 345 100, 552, G. Taylor, Regulation Industrial Relations, 18. did, view, identifying were—a differently turned extent, 746; turning point 350 1004, 650, 867, petition, judgment; intervening litigation become cf. Monrosa Carbon Black Export, 359 180, 710, 723, vacated denied. 864, 90, 73. displayed sympathy theory breach U.S.App.D.D., 210—211, 214—215. Feinsinger, Bargaining, Mich.L.Rev. 806—807. ruling, contra involved. Benedict Coal 259 346, 351, divided 459, 489. Said Board: 'Consequently, engages unreasonable where, sanctioned Act.' 771—772. ground unnecessary pass affirmance Appeals' urged standards 8(c) 158(c), points touched notes 'Employees self-organization, form, join assist organizations, choosing, aid 452, amended, 140, 157, 157. employer—(1) with, restrain, coerce 158(a) (1), 158(a)(1). number 7. held, things, (made practice) 8. requires oral overruled prevail regardless status today rulings case's direct board modified Supreme question. assailed make, statutes. stand. focus attention 7; long beginning relate pre-emption decide 'no longer application,' San Diego Building Council Garmon, 236, 773, 780, 775, doctrine interpretation processes, atypical answer Therefore compound defects now discarded pre-emption; amount saying foreclosed adjudicative development rendered (as 8(b)(3)) litigated all, seriously. Hence construe uninfluenced Briggs-Stratton. re-examine 501. 161, 142(2), enough N.L.R.A., 457, 151, 163, 163. applied, practice. tendered Briggs-Stratton, connection U.S., 258—263, 523—526, especially page; alternative holding, 263—264, 526, however defined, unlike inhibition Perhaps element open also, certainly open. event, reversal is, believe, bottomed quotes, this, Order Telegraphers Railway Express Agency, 321 64 582, 585, 88 788, matter-the 'To 'there propriety NLRB's prohibition.' 1437. Though brief proposition, (following approach) contains insofar concerned; discuss expressly opposite conclusion. 'If relative test, Is abuse 'bargaining powers' threaten department store weeks Easter discussion, postponing feel severely? stall busy season building inventory stand better workers?' 1440—1441. suggestion just 772. Prudential, amicus curiae renews though baseless us. practices permanent work. They end. treated, analogously unilaterally establishing conditions, raised example anxious reduction eight seven instructed members, process, quit hour daily. Note, 502, 509. presented interprets require, particular, relations.' 'abuse powers.' 746. House bill, list 'unlawful likely H.R. 3020, postponed merits motion AFL CIO, style merger contingent deleted party. 872, 137, 112. merits, predecessor successor ever important, best decided then. worth, treat proceeding. Lion Oil 282, 330, 331. provided: shall: 1. Cease desist authorizing, directing, supporting, inducing encouraging slowdowns, disregard routines, accept derogation plenty methods coercion physical violence.' Taft, 4024. states, prevention Cong. Rec. acted discretion furnish information practice.' (352 261) cited withholding weighty sincerely, predicated 153, 155, 756, 757. lower determination, 235 319, 322, sections afford regulation, n. infra, Although am definitions inapplicable 13. 501(2), independently immune regulation. observation inclusion 8(b)(4), 263, precluding States. crux argued appears text history. conceivable word statutes obvious application. Sess. (1947), 28. adopted Conference. H.R.Conf.Rep. 510, 59. 'dispensation protection' 'slowdowns' misreads regards valid loosely described 'slowdown' sponsorship falls incorporated retaliation portions quoted

Category: 6