Document: 396 U.S. 258 90 S.Ct. 417 24 L.Ed.2d 405 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,v.J.H. RUTTER-REX MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Inc., et al. No. 32. Argued Oct. 22, 1969. Decided Dec. 15, Rehearing Denied Feb. 24, 1970. See 397 929, 895. Arnold Ordman, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Henry J. Read, New Orleans, La., respondent J.H. Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Co. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case presents question whether, when an employer has improperly failed to reinstate striking employees, and National Labor Relations Board after considerable delay ordered back pay those a court appeals may, on account delay, modify Board's order provide early cutoff date pay. In circumstances this case, we hold such modification be unwarranted interference with remedial power implement policies Act. 2 * The employees in chose Amalgamated Clothing Workers America, AFL—CIO, as their bargaining representative January 1954. After three sessions between union company, went out strike April At that point thereafter company refused bargain further representatives. Charges unfair labor practices, including refusal good faith, were filed against company. 1955, while these charges pending, terminated applied reinstatement many strikers. reinstated some others. 3 February 1956 found had indeed been guilty unlawful bargain. It offer all strikers who applied, 'make applicants whole any loss suffered by reason refusal, if any, them.' Mfg. Co., 115 N.L.R.B. 388, 391 (1956). As is apparently practice cases involving strikers, did not name individuals covered, but left disputes over details compliance stage proceedings. Court Appeals enforced order. NLRB v. 245 F.2d 594 (C.A.5th Cir. 1957), entered its decree August 19, 1957. 4 On 21, 1957, regional office sent standard letter describing procedures, which included following: 5 'When you have fully complied affirmative terms Decree there are no violations negative provisions, will notified closed. Until receive notice know still remains open purposes awaiting compliance.' 6 November 7, wrote stating it 'some provisions decree,' asking bring 'any instance failure comply order' company's attention. answer letter, heard nothing until March 1960, officer assigned him, requested payroll other records necessary determine employment back-pay rights employees. 7 16, 1961, 428-page specification, alleging owed more than $342,000 207 either within five days applying, or never reinstated, violation orders. permanent stay action proceedings, delayed issuing specification. By affidavit, explained was caused part great complexity task processing claims approximately 600 extremely heavy caseload severe limitations staff Orleans experienced during late 1950's. noted regrettable, denied stay. 305 242 1962). 8 lengthy hearing, Trial Examiner 35 claimants, reduced amount due just $160,000. He determined each employee should net pay, computed according usual formula,1 period running from his application made complying offer. Where made, accrue through last quarter specification filed. His findings recommendations adopted minor modifications June 6, 1966. 158 1414 (1966). Both considered rejected contention bar award, part. 9 review, 'inordinate' § 6(a) Administrative Procedure Act, 60 Stat. 240, U.S.C. 1005(a), now 555(b) (1964 ed., Supp. IV), prejudice 'lulled into belief satisfied expected.' NLRB, 399 356, 363 1968). Arguing purpose awards 'deter practices,' id., at 364, believing substantial award would sufficient achieve deterrent effect, modified eliminate accruing July 1, 1959, thus reducing 37 yet received offers date. We granted certiorari consider propriety modification,2 393 1117, 89 993, 22 122 (1969), reverse judgment below. II 10 start broad command 10(c) amended, 61 147, 29 160(c), upon finding committed, shall violator 'to take without well effectuate policies' stated 'a discretionary one, subject limited judicial review.' Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. 379 203, 216, 85 398, 406, 13 233 (1964). 11 legitimacy remedy discharge beyond dispute, Mastro Plastics 350 270, 278, 76 349, 355, 100 L.Ed. 309 (1956), clear. 'A reparation designed vindicate public policy statute making losses practice.' Nathanson 344 25, 27, 73 80, 82, 97 23 (1952). remedies, 'is wield, courts.' Seven-Up Bottling 344, 346, 287, 289, 377 (1953). Board, 'in exercise informed discretion,' makes restoration way 'should stand unless can shown patent attempt ends fairly said Act." Id., 346—347, S.Ct., 289. 12 Here December 1961 That clearly falls general whole, restoring economic status quo obtained wrongful them. encompassed earned less relevant quarterly periods they have, old substantially equivalent jobs Thus Appeals' modification, cutting off accrual arbitrary worse refusing reinstatement. Either bear cost delay. placed wrongfully effort discipline shifted wrongdoing innocent justified proper balancing interests prejudiced litigating full restitution. statutory support position what took duty under Act 'proceed reasonable dispatch conclude matter presented it.' 1005(a). Thus, reasoned, fell admonition reviewing courts 'rubber-stamp affirmance administrative decisions deem inconsistent mandate frustrate congressional underlying statute.' Brown, 380 291, 980, 988, 839 (1965). 14 Assuming deciding violate prompt does follow enforcement abuse discretion. Wronged least much injured collecting employer. view 'the hardship years undeservedly substandard earnings,' delays 'must render wholly inadequate unsatisfactory remedy' Corp., 354 170, 180 (C.A.2d 1965). held before required place consequences own even inordinate, wronged benefit employers. Electric Vacuum Cleaner 315 685, 698, 62 846, 852, 86 1120 (1942); Katz, 369 736, 748 n. 82 1107, 1114, 230 (1962). 15 reasoned deterrence backpay sufficiently serve purposes. But could properly only punishment rpactice, also restore, so far possible, act. Cf. Phelps Dodge 313 177, 194, 845, 1271 (1941). 16 Finally, F.2d, 363. need decide whether sort estoppel argument justify appears case. remain No closing ever given. itself stated, subsequent called attention 'could shift avoid Ibid. 17 do mean process deplorable. deplorable if, thought, hampered presentation defenses seems clear, live incomes combined result illegal may courts, compelled earlier action.3 exceeded narrow scope review provided orders 18 Reversed. 19 DOUGLAS, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE HARLAN concur, dissenting. 20 Universal Camera 340 474, 71 456, 95 requires dismissal writ certiorari. 21 To with, allowed wide field discretion committed practice. 198, 854, 1271: 'The must remembered, entrusted discretion; mechanically And applying authority orders, used stereotyped formulas availed freedom given Congress attain results diverse, complicated situations.' automatic 'right' concerned Board. Prior decision, conceived function one; looked evidence which, viewed isolation, substantiated findings. registered dissatisfaction restricted test Taft-Hartley one 'substantial record whole.' 148, 160(e). meant 'assume responsibility reasonableness fairness decisions' past. U.S., 490, 465. 25 impact decision vest supervisory Accordingly, role one. put way: 26 'Our correctness present ought seldom action. Whether agency keeping Courts Appeals. intervene rare misapprehended grossly misapplied.' 490—491, 466. 27 problem working equities Because initiating proceedings respect original deemed unreasonable, saw fit specific facts relating actions taken arrived 'for assuring keeps bounds' (id., 466) area necessarily involves 'diverse, 28 Casting issue 'law' rather 'fact' conceal departure learning Camera: appeals, Court, watchdogs I dismiss improvidently granted. 345, 288, reversed entirety, supported evidence. 365. Certiorari sought Section 10(e)(A) 1009(e) (A), 706(1) provides 'compel unlawfully withheld unreasonably delayed.'

Category: 8