Legal Document

376 U.S. 492 84 Supreme Court Reporter 899 11 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 863 UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, et al., Petitioners,v.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD al. Number 89. Argued Feb. 19, 1964. Decided March 23, Jerry D. Anker, Washington, D.C., for petitioners. Dominick L. Manoli, National Labor Relations Board. Theophil C. Kammholz, respondents. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The question presented by this case is whether a union violates § 8(b)(4) Act,1 49 Statutes-at-Large 449, as amended, picketing an entrance, used exclusively railroad personnel, to spur track located on right-of-way owned and adjacent struck employer's premises. 2 On 2, 1960, after petitioning respondent company, Carrier Corporation, failed agree upon collective bargaining contract union, which was certified agent, called strike in support its demands. During course picketed several entrances plant. Along south boundary Carrier's property 35-foot deliveries three other companies area, General Electric, Western Brace-Mueller-Huntley. ran across Thompson Road, public thoroughfare bounded west, through gate continuous chain-link fence enclosed both Corporation right-of-way. locked when not use accessible only employees. with we are concerned occurred at gate. 3 Between 10, personnel made trips purpose switching out cars Electric Brace-Mueller-Huntley, also supply coal Electric.2 switch engine manned regular crew one trip serving nonstruck corporations. It then returned, time supervisory 14 empty boxcars. pickets, being aware that these were destined Carrier, milled around from it reached western side attempting impede progress. By inching way road, however, locomotive succeeded reaching entering After uncoupling empties just inside right-of-way, future picked up 16 more wanted shipped back toward This resistance strikers intense. Some men stood footboard engine, others prostrated themselves rails official parked his car track. Invective threats directed operators train, pickets dispersed deputies Onondaga County sheriff's office able pass. 4 Acting charges filed Regional Director Board issued complaint against international local organizations individual officials each, alleging violations §§ 8(b)(1)(A) 8(b)(4)(i) (ii)(B) Act. Trial Examiner found violation sections recommended appropriate cease-and-desist orders. sustained Examiner's finding unfair labor practice had been committed under entered order accordingly. does contest determination further concluded, primary activity therefore saved 8(b)(4)(B)'s proscription proviso 'nothing contained clause (B) shall be construed make unlawful, where otherwise any or picketing.' Noting conceded fact removals connection normal operations employer, regarded dispositive Court's decision Local 761, Intern. Union Elec., Radio & Machine Workers, etc. versus Board, 366 667, 81 1285, 6 592, case. 132 N.L.R.B. 127. 5 Appeals Second Circuit reversed Board's ground solely neutral employees could incident what court considered legitimate objective: publicizing dispute involved therein, those working Carrier. holding deemed inapposite since present premises belonging employer. 311 Federal Reporter, 2nd 135. Chief Judge Lumbard dissented. Because asserted conflict importance problem national policy granted certiorari. 373 908, 83 1298, 10 410. We reverse Appeals. activities clearly fall within clauses (i) (ii) 8(b)(4); likewise objective, induce cease providing freight service duration strike, covered language subsection (B), exclusive proviso. have although literally definition secondary 8(b) (4), nevertheless protected area carved Congress (B). 7 dividing line between forbidden has subject intense litigation before 1959 amendments 8(b)(4), broadened coverage section but added express exceptions picketing. need detail sometimes confusing litigation; case, supra, undertook survey cases dealing sites result largely governs one. In because union's object enmesh 'employees employers dispute' ordered separate certain independent contractors who doing work basis considerable period time. 123 1547. Court, occupied employer alone, rgiht engage may given unlimited effect 'all attempts, allied means, cut off deliveries, pickups, employment plant will outside purview Section 8(b)(4)(A).'3 But insisted facts common situs continuously done hence rules Moore Dry Dock case4 should applied. hand, argued no activity. 8 accepted approach neither nor Union. location picketing, though important, decisive significance; simply site Neither, all occurring gates legality depended type gate; if duties connected them activity, their unrelated day-to-day operation plant, practice. NLRB vacated permit accordance proper test. 9 seems clear rejection position leaves room even narrower incidental appeals Under test, delivery would permitted, expressly disapproved Electric: 'On devised barring invasion traditional appealing whose tasks aid everyday operations.' U.S., 680—681, S.Ct., 1293, 592. Although prior rendered 1961 bottomed amended law legislative history.5 think Electric's construction 8(b)(4)(B) sound disturb it. proviso, aimed applying economic pressure halting preserved right strike; 'primary picketing' ban. Picketing traditionally major weapon implement goals characteristically approaching mission selling, delivering contributing endeavoring halt. light goal pressures intended preserve picket during reserved furnishing essential plant's operations.6 Nor put aside reason New York Central Railroad roperty important factor, little, any, significance: 12 'In undisputed railroad's furtherance business. equally record attempt interfere plants than encouraged to, did they, refuse serve plants. designed accomplish own might accomplished. surrounding continuation there place brought home workers servicing Carrier.' 135, 154. 13 adjoined company entrance For purposes so proximate related illegal another argument: thwarts amendment bring railroads protection 8(b)(4). definitions 'employer' 'employee' 2(2) 2(3) Act specifically exclude 'any person Railway Act' such 'person.' Prior 1959, prohibited inducements 'the employees' arose authority Courts boycott provisions applied employees.7 resolved revising proscribe inducement stoppages employed person.' There indication whatever revision do eliminate uncertainty deriving words thereby extend same protections enjoyed. Our derogate equality treatment. contrary, rule contends better footing business distinguish design conveyed service, anomaly believe intended. 15 Finally, reject argument ordinary violative accompanied violence. distinction carried maintained rest peaceful violent nature conduct, Such become violence interferes intercourse employer.8 say, course, respects legal escape federal thereof. all, think, provides nothing 'shall (Emphasis supplied.) possible read mean save laws, interpretation condemn conduct long violence, some law. our view, 'where unlawful' inserted while excluding sanctions, legalize state federal. 'primary,' must determined statute 17 Reversed. 18 DOUGLAS concurs result. 19 GOLDBERG took part consideration pertinent follows: '(b) organization agents— '(4) in, encourage engaged commerce industry affecting refusal use, manufacture, process, transport, otherwise, handle goods, articles, materials, commodities perform services; threaten, coerce, restrain commerce, either thereof is— '(B) forcing r quiring using, handling, transporting, products producer, processor, manufacturer, person, requiring recognize bargain representative unless 159 title: Provided, That 29 Code KF62 (Supp. IV) 158(b)(4). objection obtained Brief Electrical Workers 761 321, October Term, Page 31. Sailors' Pacific, 92 547. said: 'The Amendments Act, removed word 'concerted' provisions, included I, 1959) 158(b)(4)(B), Annotated KF65 U5 158(b)(4) fear removal interpreted factory 8(b)(4)(A) truck drivers trucker usual services compel trucking firm * manufacturer strike.' Analysis bill prepared Senator Kennedy Representative Thompson, 105 Cong.Rec. 16589.' 681, See H.R.Rep. 741, H.R. 8342, 86th Cong., 1st Sess., 21, 80; 1147, S. 1555, 38; Leg.Dist. Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure 1575—1576, 1707, 1857; U.S.Code Congressional Administrative News 2318. Compare International Brotherhood Teamsters (The Rice Milling Co.), 360; Woodworkers America (Smith Lumber 116 1756; Alling Cory Company), 121 315; Sawmill 2409 (Great Northern 122 1403, 183 21 (C.A.5th Cir.); Smith 246 129 Great 272 741 (C.A.9th Cir.). Co., 341 665, 672, 71 961, 964, 95 L.Ed. 1284, instant material. based such. To reach it, properly relied addressed itself authorities. substitution coercion persuasion complained-of into encouragement proscribed section, rather means adopted felt.'

Classification Label: 6