Legal Document

463 U.S. 147 103 S.Ct. 2926 77 L.Ed.2d 535 EDWARD J. DeBARTOLO CORP., Petitionerv.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD et al. No. 81-1985. Argued March 22, 1983. Decided June 24, Syllabus Section 8(b)(4) of the National Labor Relations Act prohibits secondary boycotts, but its so-called "publicity proviso" exempts from prohibition publicity advising public that a product is produced by an employer with whom union has primary dispute and distributed another employer. As result wage between respondent building contractor retained company to construct department store in shopping center owned operated petitioner, passed out handbills consumers urging them not patronize any stores until petitioner publicly promised all construction at would be done contractors who pay their employees fair wages fringe benefits. Petitioner filed unfair labor practice charge Board, which held handbilling was exempted boycott § dismissed complaint. The Board reasoned there "symbiotic" relationship tenants, including company, they derive substantial benefit "product" constructing, namely, new store, contractor's status as producer bringing total consumer within proviso." Court Appeals agreed, holding tenants were distributors meaning proviso. Held: does come protection Pp. 153-157. (a) only intended inform employer's "distributed by" Here, Board's analysis almost strip distribution requirement limiting effect diverts inquiry away employers toward two employers. It then tests standard so generous it satisfied virtually might want boycott. 155-156. (b) issue did merely call for company's products; also called products being sold cotenants. Neither nor cotenants had business do sell whose chain production can reasonably said include contractor. Hence, no justification treating distribute 156-157. 662 F.2d 264 (4th Cir.1981), vacated remanded. Lawrence M. Cohen, Chicago, Ill., petitioner. Norton Come, Washington, D.C., respondents. Justice STEVENS delivered opinion court. 1 H.J. High Construction Company (High), trade group kind High. question presented whether against boycotts contained 8(b)(4)1 Act, amended, 29 U.S.C. 158(b)(4), what known section.2 2 general H.M. Wilson (Wilson) Tampa, Florida. Petitioner, Edward DeBartolo (DeBartolo) owns operates center. Most 85 mall signed lease providing minimum rent (which increases whenever large opens business) plus percentage gross sales, requiring tenant proportionate share costs maintaining mall's common areas, dues merchants' association, take part four joint advertising brochures. slightly different land agreement, he association areas. Under terms Wilson's lease, neither other right control manner discharged contractual obligation Wilson. 3 conducted entrances about three weeks, while under construction. Without identifying name, handbill stated Department Store paying substandard wages, asked readers benefits.3 orderly manner, accompanied picketing or patrolling. advised oppose this if modified message make clear involve DeBar olo co-tenants, limited activities immediate vicinity Wilson's. When persisted distributing patrons center, trespass action state court Board. General Counsel issued 4 complaint recited High, noted absence DeBartolo, Wilson, East Lake Mall. alleged furtherance "has threatened, coerced restrained, threatening, coercing restraining, various Employers are engaged Square Mall, space above-described Employers. . ." Complaint ¶ 8(a). object "was is, force require aforesaid Mall cease using, handling, transporting, otherwise dealing and/or services of, doing order High." 8(b). 5 After answer, parties stipulated relevant facts submitted matter decision. deciding constituted form "coercion" "restraint" proscribed 8(b)(4), concluded Florida Gulf Coast Building Trades Council, AFL-CIO (Edward Corp.), 252 N.L.R.B. 702 (1980). namely store. expressly could product, High's brought proviso.4 6 agreed. Corp. v. NLRB, (CA4 1981). observed our decision NLRB Servette, Inc., 377 46, 84 1098, 12 121 (1964), rejected narrow reading proviso consistently construed expansive manner. Finding interpretation consistent rationale This reflected court's belief response union's handbilling, storekeepers able "in turn, apply pressure on F.2d, 271. Because conflicts Eighth Circuit Pet, Inc. 641 545 (CA8 1981), we granted certiorari. --- ----, 205, 74 164 (1982).5 7 correctly point cannot obtain relief proceeding unless prevails separate issues. must prove "threaten, coerce, restrain" person commerce, "forcing requiring" someone else—that say, violation 8(b)(4)(ii)(B). overcome both defense based claim conduct protected First Amendment. considered case covered 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) Amendment, because found fell We therefore limit attention issue. 8 applies communications "other than picketing," "truthful," produce either interference deliveries work stoppage firm dispute. these conditions met, findings now challenged. "advis[ed] organization employer." agree language limits proviso's designed create products. They agree, however, constitutes producer-distributor relationship. 9 have analyzed one case, (1964). Servette involved wholesale distributor candy certain specialty items supermarkets. front some buy purchased Servette. even though actually manufacture distributed, should still regarded "producer" thus (Servette) (the supermarket). 10 In reaching conclusion, looked legislative history Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure 1959, Pub.L. 86-257, 73 Stat. 519 seq., simultaneously strengthened added principal source congressional concern been Teamsters Union, most represented motor carriers "produce" goods technical sense verb. Teamsters' plainly prohibitions 8(b)(4)(ii)(B), declined hold Congress, using word "produced," exclude entirely offsetting protections "There nothing suggests narrower coverage exception, see basis attributing such incongruous purpose Congress." U.S., 55, S.Ct., 1104. 11 focus term "producer." willing concede distributes "produced" statute. mean workers, like truck drivers, may perform essential goods. assume employer, proviso.6 Indeed, here "coverage"—the types disputes allows publicized—is broad enough prohibited activity.7 reject, extent activity permits. persuaded Congress included reflect motivates 8(b)(4): "shielding unoffending others pressures controversies own." Denver 341 675, 692, 71 943, 953, 95 L.Ed. 1284 (1951).8 find Instead, relied theory symbiotic work. That effect. will Yet peaceful, truthful informs fall proviso, statute requirement.9 13 contracted receive subject dispute, cost those presumably prices But Nor Since erred concluding came 14 Stressing fact arises peaceful written message, rather picketing, argues speech without completely endorsing constitutional argument, contends sufficient invoke Court's prudential policy construing acts avoid unnecessary serious questions. See Catholic Bishop, 440 490, 500-501, 99 1313, 1318-1319, 59 533 (1979). doctrine, serves authorize "fairly possible." Crowell Benson, 285 62, 52 285, 296, 76 598 (1932). believe meets standard.10 15 Nevertheless, reach case. For, outset, yet decided Act. rested never whether, apart 8(b)(4)(ii)(B).11 Until statutory decided, review premature. 16 judgment remanded further proceedings opinion. 17 ordered. section makes agents "(ii) threaten, restrain commerce industry affecting where thereof is: "(B) forcing selling, producer, processor manufacturer, person. 61 140, 158(b)(4). reads follows: "Provided further, purposes paragraph (4) only, shall prohibit publicity, truthfully public, members organization, long inducing individual employed course his employment refuse pick up, deliver, transport goods, services, establishment distribution." 543, read: PLEASE DON'T SHOP AT EAST LAKE SQUARE MALL FLA. GULF COAST BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL, requesting you shop ownership's contribution wages. premises built past, Mall's owner, Corporation, supported local economy insuring Now, apparent reason, owners taken giant step backwards permitting standards torn down. payment diminishes working person's ability purchase earned, borrowed, dollars, undercuts entire community. low time inflation means decreased purchasing power, intend compensate power workers community encouraging cut lower profits? CUT-RATE WAGES ARE NOT FAIR UNLESS MERCHANDISE PRICES ALSO CUT-RATE. ask support protest Please owner promises IF YOU MUST ENTER THE TO DO BUSINESS, please express managers your over efforts. appealing public—the consumer. seeking induce deliveries. concluded: "In sum, mutual obligations benefits derived participation enterprise nature unlike operations diversified corporation. i.e., benefit. Consequently, capital, enterprise, service 'producer' used interpreted Supreme [377 (1964) ], [244 96 (1979) ]. "Having Respondent's Act." N.L.R.B., 705. successful enjoined ceased January 4, 1980. moot. number centers locations throughout United States maintains engage comparable future similar problem again arise. possibility, together desist protect recurrence future, provides Cf. Local 712, IBEW (Goldendorm Foods), 134 812 (1961) (electrical refrigeration work); Plumbers & Pipefitters, 142 (Shop-Rite 133 307 (refrigeration work). International Brotherhood Teamsters, 537 (Lohman Sales Co.), 132 901, 907 (1961), "there suggestion itself legi lative words 'product' 'produced' special limitation." Longshoremen's Association, Allied International, 456 212, 223, 102 1656, 1663, 72 21 (1982); Carpenters 357 93, 100, 78 1011, 1016, 1186 (1958); H.Rep. 245, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. Legislative History Management 1947, 315 (1948). concedes brief restrict scope acknowledges customers nonpicketing immediately directed." Brief 9. Concededly, "[t]he outgrowth profound Senate unions' freedom appeal adequately safeguarded." supra, several legislators referred Amendment explicitly during debates. E.g., 1037 (Sen. Humphrey); id., 1722 (Rep. Udall). fact, confirms presumption underlies Bishop Crowell: when legislates fashion restricts communicative activity, expects narrowly. 507, 1322. not, expect deprived practical Retail Employees, 1001, 447 607, 100 2372, 65 (1980) (picket line advocating portion proscribed); Fruit Vegetable Packers Warehousemen, 706 ("Tree Fruits"), 58, 1063, 129 insubstantial proscribed).

Classification Label: 6