Legal Document

481 U.S. 429 107 S.Ct. 1841 95 L.Ed.2d 381 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, et al., Petitionersv.BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE WAY EMPLOYES al. No. 86-39. Argued Feb. 23, 1987. Decided April 28, Syllabus Respondent Brotherhood of Maintenance Way Employes (BMWE) which represents railroad employes nationwide, had a dispute over renewal collective-bargaining agreement with small that is subsidiary Guilford Transportation Industries, Inc. (Guilford), also owns other railroads. After exhausting the settlement procedures mandated by Railway Labor Act (RLA), BMWE instituted lawful strike against later extended its picketing to railroads (including petitioners) interchanged traffic. In petitioners' consolidated actions, Federal District Court entered preliminary injunction BMWE's any than those involved in primary dispute. The court held "substantial alignment" test governs interpretation Norris-LaGuardia Act, §§ 1 and 4 bar federal courts from issuing injunctions activities "growing out of" "labor dispute." Under test, scope activity confined further union's economic interests labor dispute, are directed at employer substantially aligned employers—those having an ownership interest in, or providing essential services facilities to, employer. concluded none petitioners were "substantially aligned" Guilford, thus secondary did not grow under could be enjoined. Appeals reversed, concluding no jurisdiction enter injunction. Held: does have JURISDICTION enjoin railway disputes. Pp. 437-453. (a) historical background particularly legislative history showing Congress was responding what it considered unduly restrictive judicial construction anti-injunction provisions § 20 Clayton Act—reveals intended preclude enjoining as well activity, treated differently industries such regard. 437-440. (b) Section 13(c) defines dispute" including "any controversy concerning terms conditions employment . regardless whether disputants stand proximate relation employee," 13(a) provides case shall "grow when involves persons who engaged same industry." plain meaning this language, here unquestionably grew 13(c)'s definition should narrowed adoption picketed broad, substantial-alignment would require courts, contrary Congress' intent, second-guess truly Moreover, nothing RLA distinguishes permissible impermissible activities, attempt limit language make lawfulness depend upon views social policy, designed forestall. 440-443. (c) Petitoners' contention valid because, RLA, illegal for union resort after parties exhausted RLA's major resolution procedures, without merit. Although deprive compliance provisions—involving negotiation, mediation, voluntary arbitration, conciliation—the expressly self-help available once been exhausted. silence regard indicate viewed express prohibition superfluous prohibit picketing. Cf. Trainmen v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 394 369, 89 1109, 22 344 (1969). There merit contentions National Relations (NLRA) some forms govern RLA. Congressional expressed NLRA, remains neither employers nor NLRB permitted seek conduct employees. Nor there argument ban on may inferred general 2 First places employees duty settle disputes thereby avoid interruption interstate commerce. Nothing indicates permit means strikes interruptions Furthermore, mechanism Executive Branch intervene interrupt measures invoking Emergency Board, imposing minimum 60-day cooling-off period. If Board's recommendations initially accepted parties, enforce recommendation statute, done case. Allowing period inconsistent structure purpose fact increase likelihood prior self-help. 444-453. 793 F.2d 795 (CA7 1986), affirmed. BRENNAN, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Rex E. Lee, Washington, D.C., petitioners. John O'B. Clarke, Jr., respondents. Justice BRENNAN What began between Maine expanded threats around country. A then enjoined question we must decide has issue * nationwide. Its members include Central Railroad Portland Company, subsidiaries (Guilford). two railroads, Delaware Hudson Boston Corporation. system covers 4,000 miles track northeast United States, east Buffalo Maine, north Montreal. large, however, depends carry much 3 crux Central's decision, following acquisition 1981, abolish 5-year jobs roughly 300 400 represented BMWE. expired 1984, before able reach either problem job losses various questions wages, hours, working conditions. "over formation collective agreements efforts secure them" "major parlance law, Elgin, J. & E.R. Co. Burley, 325 711, 723, 65 1282, 1289, L.Ed. 1886 (1945), governed 44 Stat. 577, amended, 45 U.S.C. 151 seq. For year, attempted detailed On March 3, 1986, these Terminal. Two days later, lawfully Guilford's subsidiaries.1 It first appeared desired effect slowing traffic lines. But supervisors took responsibilities striking workers, several weeks volume lines increase. received information led believe receiving financial assistance (a belief proved mistaken), observed non-Guilford locomotives moving perceived become less willing negotiate. 5 early April, decided extend beyond subsidiaries. picket significant This federal-court orders.2 8, notified president American Association Railroads plans carriers ask carriers' withdraw service until willingness bargain increased. addition, "strategic locations through flowed, Chicago," Brief Respondents 4, Los Angeles Union Pacific based (again mistaken) assisting 6 9, 62 (not petitioner Burlington Northern Company (Burlington Northern)), filed suit States Columbia, seeking temporary restraining order Their request denied next day. Alton Southern R. BMWE, 639 F.Supp. 220 (1986). Meanwhile, sought obtained ex parte Illinois, Northern. six quickly notices dismissal Columbia new actions 10 11 Illinois. 11, issued orders each cases seven 7 Illinois single hearing railroads' motion 21, 1986. noted 47 70, 29 101, 104, App. Pet. Cert. 27a-28a. sections inapplicable, because phrase defined 113(a). limiting range employed Ashley, Drew N.R. Affiliated Local 1121, 625 1357 (CA8 1980). (and hence dispute) concludes will "furthe[r] Id., 1363. Only pass test. if railroad, otherwise shares " 'significant commonality interest.' 31a (quoting Drew, supra, 1365). Because purposes therefore enjoined.3 8 reversed. 1986). rejected both Court's it. turned raised but addressed Court—that prevent violates statutes. concluded, that, even assuming contain prohibition, "the prevents use self-help" process complete. 804-805. injunction, ordered dismiss complaints. 9 While proceedings pending, steps resolve controversy. May 16, pursuant 160, President Order 12557, 51 Fed.Reg. 18429 Order, Presidential Board 209 convened given task investigating reporting within 30 days. during 30-day period, report delivered, return maintain status quo June 20, binding, accept them. August passed joint establishing advisory board perform second investigation report. Four September advised enact legislation binding 209. promptly signed bill into law. Pub.L. 99-431, 100 987.4 We granted certiorari, 479 812, 60, 93 19 (1986), Circuit conflict propriety using narrow address, necessary, applicability II "The expresses basic policy unions." Machinists Street, 367 740, 772, 81 1784, 1802, 1141 (1961). states "[n]o permanent involving growing except strict conformity chapter." 101. enumerates specific acts subject injunction; include: 12 "(a) Ceasing refusing work remain employment; 13 14 "(e) Giving publicity existence of, facts advertising, speaking, patrolling, method fraud violence." 104(a), 104(e). 15 congressional debates disclose Act's sponsors convinced extraordinary step divesting equitable necessary remedy problem. According sponsors, refused abide clear command stated part: 16 "[N]o person persons, singly concert, ceasing labor, recommending, advising, persuading others peaceful so do; attending place where be, [so recommending persuading]; peaceably assembling manner, purposes. ." 52. 17 broad enough encompass all neutral "secondary" employers. Nevertheless, Duplex Printing Press Deering, 254 443, 41 172, 349 (1921), activity. Duplex, employees' manufacturer printing presses Battle Creek, Michigan. only unlikely succeed, international representing transported, installed, serviced presses. intend protect expansion. reaching conclusion, rely certain remarks made debates, see id., 475-477, n. 1, S.Ct., 179-180, more intuition about political significance picketing, stated, "Congress mind [the protection of] particular industrial controversies, class war." 472, 178. See Bedford Stone Cutters Assn., 274 37, 522, 529, 71 916 (1927) (Brandeis, dissenting). 18 responded directly pattern judges. underlying aim restore thought formulated frustrated, believed, construction." Hutcheson, 312 219, 235-236, 61 463, 468, 85 788 (1941). Representative LaGuardia's description need typical offered House debate: "Gentlemen, one reason why Congress, disobedience law part whom? organized labor? Disobedience few satisfied construe enacted kind. administered justice employees, considering kind now. emasculated purposely misconstrued today discussing bill." 75 Cong.Rec. 5478 (1932).5 reflects decision "abolis[h], immunity, distinction 'immediate disputants' do 'in employee.' Woodwork Manufacturers NLRB, 386 612, 623, 87 1250, 1257, 357 (1967) H.R.Rep. 669, 72d Cong., 1st Sess., (1932)).6 leaves doubt cover lengthy debate, punctuated numerous references notorious Pullman Strike 1894, amendment proposed Beck exempted coverage Act. 5471-5480, 5501-5512 (1932). reveals regard.7 III 21 consider 4's inapplicable "involving "[t]he term 'labor dispute' includes employee." 113(c). pertinent that: "[a] involve industry. statutory accorded meaning, grows 23 Petitioners argue, adopt 13(c). lower decisions applied Union, F.2d, 1363-1364 (citing cases). "grows independently determines linked economically employer, furthers endorse they propose narrower substantial alignment: "a employer—and picketing—only 'joined fray' thus, effect, assumed role 48. argue cannot said Guilford. 24 reject constructions reasons. First, long recognized [of dispute"] wanted broad. write unmistakable believed previous looking toward nonjudicial intervention limited Courts." Telegraphers Chicago N.W.R. 362 330, 335-336, 80 761, 764, 774 (1960); Marine Cooks Stewards Panama S.S. 365, 779, 783, 797 (1960) ("The [Act's] intent taking business very circumstances left open Act"). 25 Accordingly, consistently declined narrowly. example, interpreted embrace "having their genesis protests" opposed self-interest. Bulk Terminals, Longshoremen, 457 702, 102 2672, 2679, 73 327 (1982).8 anomalous narrowing context motivation passing immunize injunctions. Were suggest, again commit precisely error prompted 26 Adoption variant yet another way. focus test—whether dispute," 1363—requires interest. As explained: 27 "No engages expecting advance interests. Unions lightly call chips impose burdens workers find own pay satisfactory. 'substantial alignment' weig[h] gains pressure imposes society. exaggeration say exactly doing 1932, Act." 806. 28 Finally, 386-387, 1120, (1969): cosmic principles announce conduct, condemn evil, delimit boundaries. These tasks undertaken judges, intermixing metaphysics notions policy. And common relations drawn arbitrary, tenuous, shifting separating 'primary' 'secondary' activities." industry, unlike covered (NLRA), provided "neither usable standards access administrative expertise" facilitate difficult distinguishing 392, 1123. Given inherent indeterminacy concepts lack guidance, obvious policy." Inc., U.S., 715, 2681. Even confident our mixture predecessors earlier century, produce align contemporary views, forestall attempts labor's protection. refuse exclude battles IV 31 circumstances, violations mandate statute. claim procedures. To evaluate argument, briefly review 32 "cannot appreciated apart environment came serve." 751, 1303, (1945) (Frankfurter, Following decades unrest persistently revealed shortcomings every address problems, representatives management created 1926.9 subjects virtually endless "negotiation, conciliation."10 Detroit Toledo Shore Line 396 142, 148-149, 90 294, 298, (1969) (Shore Line). requires "to exert reasonable effort maintain" collectively bargained agreements, most recent exhausted, 5, 6, 10; Line, 150-153, 299-301. exhaust loggerheads, attempting restrictions follow invocation 378-379, 1115 "long line decisions" upholding parties' right exhaustion). 33 function framers intended, mandates obviously essential. accommodate competing demands establish 34 "does Virginian [Railway Employees], 515 [57 592, 789]; Graham Locomotive Firemen Enginemen, 338 232 [70 14, 94 (1949) ]." 772-773 [81 1802]; N.W. 402 570, 581-582 [91 1731, 1737-1738, 187] (1971).11 35 exception necessarily one. violation shown, "[c]ourts hesitate fix injunctive unless alone can effectively guard plaintiff's right." Machinists, 773, 1802. 36 concede, must, They drafters insert 1926 clearly prohibited banning already superfluous, limits existed time became law.12 read too much, just easily signify allow whatever legally arises. Faced choice ambiguity unambiguous choose latter.13 37 Indeed, state needed distinguish "parties unsuccessfully [may] employ full power muster, conflicts obligation imposed law." disputes, "until acts, picketing—whether characterized secondary—must deemed protected proscription." 392-393, 38 note us determine assess state- power. 382, 18, 1117, 18. rationale decision—that "we furnished evaluating picketing—remains equally persuasive today, years since guidance subject. Where Judiciary lacks manageable standards, forbidden tread. 39 when, here, provide answer problem, looked NLRA "for construing" 383, 1118. embodies view unfair practice, 40 "sweeping prohibition" activity; instead "describes condemns objectives." Carpenters 93, 98, 78 1011, 1015, 1186 (1958). prohibit. grants (NLRB) exclusive authority 158(b)(4), 160(j), 160(l ). Thus, obtain excluded rail NLRA: 152(2), 152(3). conclude clearer allowed merely I. 353 30, 77 635, 622 (1957) (Chicago River ), minor compulsory arbitration Adjustment Board. forbids Similarly, 91 187 (1971) North Western exhaustion comply effort" 152 First. declares obligations enforceable self-help, Western, River, Act.14 42 Turning case, 43 "It carriers, officers, agents, rates pay, rules, conditions, arising application otherwise, commerce operation carrier thereof." emphasis section duty, correctly note, consistent RLA: '[T]o prevent, possible, wasteful commerce.' quoting 148, 298. 328, 69th (1926). construing unions manifestly RLA.15 agree goal commerce, end. An dispute—it simply disables parties. "in avoiding strike," Employees, 515, 552, 57 601, 789 (1937), availability effectiveness settling creating incentive procedures: 46 "Underlying entire framework born knowledge final instance traditional brought bear agreement. machinery nears termination achieving settlement, threat pressures informed public create impetus compromise agreement." 597-598, 1745 (BRENNAN, illustrates, ready here. scheme begin involvement." 595, 1744 48 opinions regarding success meeting goals varied time, appear picketing.16 decline, advanced stage development, implied Instead, "if now abuses nature arisen industry Courts, balance 'between uncontrolled respective interests.' V 49 "Th[e] judge-made late 19th 20th centuries self-mesmerized theory misconstruction." 1117. evolution attitudes dissipated legitimate concern impartiality judges management." Forge Steelworkers, 428 397, 432, 96 3141, 3159, 1022 (1976) (STEVENS, ultimately turns concerns partiality, divested seen fit affirm Appeals. 50 ordered. extension strike. 86-0084-P (D Me. Apr. 2, Consolidated Rail Corp. Civ. 86-0318T (WDNY vacated, 792 303 (CA2 cert. 86-353; Richmond, Fredericksburg Potomac 86-3544 (CA4 12, aff'd, 1161 86-503. alternative, ruled violated Interstate Commerce 11101(a). explained, 795, 800 alternative holding lifted unlawful other, nonlabor statute." 339, 766, (1960). railroads; 799, pursued developments moot reasonably likely themselves issues petition, typically resolved executive action, capable repetition evading review. Weinstein Bradford, 423 147, 347, 350 (1975) (per curiam ); Sosna Iowa, 419 393, 553, 532 (1975). 5470 (1932) (statement Rep. Browning) ("[I]nstead [Clayton] act being construed denatured, emasculated, tortured instrument oppression whom relieve. example I refer you famous case"); 5468 Beedy); 5464 O'Connor); 5488 Celler); 2-11 (1932); S.Rep. 163, 7-14, 16-18 229-237, 464-469, (1941); Allen Bradley Electrical Workers, 797, 803-805, 1533, 1537-1538, 1939 (1945); Meat Jewel Tea 676, 701-711, 1596, 1609-1615, 640 (1965) (opinion Goldberg, J.). 231, 465 ("[T]he established allowable area restricted, immediate employer-employee relation"). last word 1947 Taft-Hartley 1959 Landrum-Griffin amendments 160. explain infra, 448—449, amendments, 152, applies 1932. (picketing seamen foreign ship crew protest loss competition dispute); New Negro Alliance Sanitary Grocery 58 703, 82 1012 (1938) civic group induce store hire dispute). See, e.g, G. Eggert, Disputes (1967); L. Lecht, Experience Legislation 14-57 (1955); 755-758, nn. 1792-1795, (1961); 751-753, 1302-1304, dissenting); 542-543, 596-597, (1937). resolving summarized 378, 1115, party desiring change give written notice. 6. confer, Second, conference fails invoke Mediation proffer sua sponte finds emergency exist. mediation fails, endeavor submit take place, consent. 7. threatens 'substantially degree country transportation service, notify President,' investigate 10. way stages, unilaterally alter quo. Seventh, 10." Ninth "command 'treat with' authorized representative employees," legal equity notwithstanding 546-547, 562-563, 599, 606-607. Graham, "Railway insuring [employees'] nondiscriminatory representation bargaining agent." 240, 70 18; Steele Louisville Nashville 323 192, 199-203, 226, 230-232, 173 (1944). (1969), adhere requirement embodied supports view. 439—440, Beck's exempting understanding that. Reply 14-17. nowhere Rather, response amendment, LaGuardia stressed "provided disputes," "takes care whole situation pertaining railroads." 5499 statements imply bans rather suggest persuaded surrounding passage construction. Unlike preceded it, negotiated agreed Brotherhoods, "probably unique frankly Congress." 753, 1303 disagreement 1920's exerting persuade override courts' unwise expression enduring allegiance 1926. 1117; supra. third Clerks Florida E.C. 384 238, 86 1420, 501 (1966) (Florida East Coast carrier's included deviate pre-existing engaging non-union replace enforced approving specifying deviations abandoned conclusion light Seventh prohibiting altering agreement, basis ruling inference confronted sort protects. employer's reference itself. conclusion—that requirements lest "academic"—was rested solely 246, 1424. anti-junction mentioned implicated Coast, presented course appropriate provision purpose. Heirs Boisdore, How. 113, 122, 1009 (1849); 235, 467. make, different character inferences past point departure unambiguously compelled disputes; incompatible explicit obligation. "[T]he [thus] 338-339, 766. instant contrast, "basic command" plainly violated. asked infer refrain crucial exists. noting creates "exert drew circumstances. contain, proscription suggestion limited. Our currently expand swallow rule "In three widely-known activity." Conference Amicus Curiae 27. making statement, amicus refers 1960's, (1969); 1978 Norfolk Airline Clerks, 99 BNA LRRM 2607 1978), appeal dism'd moot, 595 1208 1979); Curiae,

Classification Label: 6