Legal Document

359 U.S. 326 79 Supreme Court Reporter 847 3 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 854 Marion S. FELTE, o n Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated, Petitioner,v.SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. et al. Number 269. Argued March 24, 1959. Decided April 27, Mr. Harry E. Wilmarth, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for petitioner. Clifton Hildebrand, Oakland, Cal., respondents. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion Court. 1 The Railway Labor Act1 was amended in 1951 to authorize labor organizations representing employees carriers make 'checkoff' agreements with deduction from employees' wages periodic dues, initiation fees assessments. Section 2 Eleventh (b), as added by 64 Statutes-at-Large 1238, 45 Code KF62 § 152 Annotated KF65 U5 152, subd. 11(b).2 amendment contains a proviso '(t)hat no such agreement shall be effective respect any individual employee until he have furnished employer written assignment organization * which revocable writing after expiration one year *.' (Emphasis supplied.) In this case Dues Deduction Agreement between respondents Brotherhood Railroad Trainmen Southern Pacific Company required that there used, necessary form revoking an assignment, nothing other than executed on forwarded employer.3 petitioner challenges contractual regulation violative employee's statutory right revoke assignment. District Northern California held requirement valid, reasoning although it 'may seem bit arbitrary' allow revocation only means provided Trainmen, 'no burden' 'easily complied with.' 155 F.Supp. 315, 317. Appeals Ninth Circuit adopted Court's affirmed. 256 Federal Reporter, 2nd 429. We granted certiorari consider important question scope (b). 358 812, 60, 56. is employed respondent, Sothe rn Company, through 1957 member respondent Trainmen. He had authorizing checkoff his case. 1957, more been effect, decided join Order Conductors Brakemen. notified resignation letter dated 30, advising them authorization check off dues sent company. same day representative petitioner's company handed duplicate Secretary-Treasurer Lodge relying provisions Agreement, declined honor forms petitioner, though they were identical should obtained advised '(t) matter being directed attention appropriate officer handling accordance Agreement.' Trainmen's local turn wrote submitted not acceptable. said 'the way you can released Wage Assignment Authorization signing A—2 card me Company.' enclosed signature noted 'We would sorry lose BRT hope may reconsider.' As result refusal treat too late stop wages. 4 execute further commenced suit against His complaint alleged action brought under Act, 'Act Congress regulating commerce'; posture jurisdiction properly invoked 28 1337, 1337.4 behalf others similarly situated; parties are dispute how many fact situated but, courts below, we do find resolve dispute,5 them, decide merits. prayed declaration proviso, requirements effecting terminated all authority favor Injunctive relief also sought. admitted continuing unrevoked, contending collective bargaining included agree upon challenged Agreement. disagree hold restrictive amendment. 5 First. relaxed Act dating 1934 forbidden making either 'union-shop' arrangements,6 or arrangements whereby amounts owed assessments.7 It thus became lawful bargain collectively arrangements; but power made subject limitations. limitation here pertinent that, force does include bind submit checkoff. Any ineffective who did furnish organization, 'revocable This failure binding empolyees deliberate part Congress. Proposals end expressly rejected. bills originally introduced House Senate, favorably reported respective Senate Committees, simply authorized 'to providing carrier its their craft class payment employees, assessments payable organization.' H.R.Rep. 2811, Page 1, S.Rep. 2262, Pages 1—2, 81st Cong., Sess. Indeed Report reveals choice finally implementation at first considered rejected; committee thought assignments remain bargaining.'8 But recurrent concern particularly Hearings, time Committee consideration bill floor, reversed view developed proviso9 allowing himself whether checkoff, year. See 96 Cong.Rec. 15735, 16268.10 passed both Houses approved. 6 structure (b) then simple: organization. Latitude allowed terms arrangements, past point impinge freedom reserved will consciously deliberately chose deny reach restrict complete specifically concerned keeping these areas table. plainly our duty effectuate obvious intention Congress, must therefore careful decision eroded name procedure, otherwise. see given regulations agreed restrictions might abstractly called 'reasonable' not. 7 Second. argued notice interests orderly provision place specify procedure. note original rejection concept supported much reasons—that inconsistent procedure—but prevail Act.11 Of course, act minimize procedural problems caused Congress' choice. Carriers set up procedures processing, themselves, revocations received, reasonable designations, out contracts, agents whom sent. Revocations, all, somewhere. And doubtless established, suggestion, available up. specific procedure established mandatory, imposing over above what perceive fairly those statute—which writing, attributable expressing carrier. 8 urge preventing fraud foregery, obviating disputes authenticity instruments. Such hardly peculiar setting. If suspects forgery revocation, within informally employee. think has power, pursuant taken jointly unilateral declaration, nullities notices clearly intended about whose dispute. 9 next justify protection himself—that is, desire checkoff—and outside undue influence so, presumably rival management. apparently foresaw discounted necessity when took hands left preliminary correspondence dealings wanted incident terminating affiliation area, undampened effective, nfo rtunate organizations, problem live. 10 Third. There some suggestion possibly apart because represented negotiation agreement, bound agent, were, establishing provision. short answer makes clear function members' agent waiving rights; doubt could waived advance exercise, event, waiver would, statute, last conceivably permissible. equally lacking merit Trainment-furnished so trivial whole controversy de minimis perhaps position judicial redress. Additional paper work correspondence, once indicated well deterrent, think, exercise free worker. When considers industrial setting recalls workmen equipped inclined business offices, complication withdraw addition extra steps burdensome. That involved deter taking if contact lodge necessary. area leaves open solicitation organizations—as where union shop established,12 even worker unionshop arrangement change affiliations, Pennsylvania R. versus Rychlik, 352 480, 492—494, 77 421, 427, 428, 480—the far trivial, facts suggest. Organizational efforts attended persuading recruit drop membership present terminate favor.13 difference weight persuasion enlist cannot intentions papers him spot recruiting say 'cooling off' period insisted creates wise unwise policy. enough believe it. meaningfully burdensome context; empowered individual's later, while insisting choose describe petty. 11 Reversed. 12 BLACK, FRANKFURTER DOUGLAS concur, dissenting. 13 & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions affirm dismissing petition declaratory judgment injunction. agree, railroad workers previously 'check-off' 'after year' grant neither Union, nor Railroad, together, take away part. am opinion, however, (B.R.T.) provides pocedure substantially aids preservation will. Since designed primarily aid Rail road, natual governing contract Union relieve possible, burdens expenses Necessarily, contemplated administered business-like manner, without imposition burden railroads. seems plain requiring B.R.T. supplied whole, just practical applied members. 14 circumstances existing call court's discretionary enter filed 12, 1957—10 days response mailed contract. At filing highly questionable claim month's dues—several dollars. possession recognized Railroad. Petitioner avoided future deductions, possible damage himself, merely mailing form. recovered illegally deducted, 15 Equity's extraordinary injunctive prevent irreparable sustained proof case; show damage, and, fact, allege Similarly, lacked adequate remedy law. Nor appropriate, said: 16 'The resorted sound discretion justice advanced rendered.' Alabama State Federation Labor, etc. McAdory, 325 450, 462, 65 1384, 1390, 89 L.Ed. 1725. 17 here, therefore, refused use process which, reality, two unions one's printed used Perhaps history produce now orders accorded comara ble circumstances. For injury except stubborn sign simple, 11-line already signed. federal adjudicating real, genuine, meaningful cases controversies consumed like one. decisions below. chapter 347, 44 577; 691, 48 1185, amended, §§ 151—163, 151—163. enacted 1926 considerably rewritten 1934. new paragraph Eleventh. follows: 'Both reproduced Organization cost Company. assume full responsibility procurement execution employes delivery position, concurred company, cards 'except While construction one, put it, since construction, course accept here. interpretation application rather validity resort grievance Adjustment Board machinery required. 'This involves contract, meaning.' Howard, 343 768, 774, 72 1022, 1025, 1283. Cf. Slocum Delaware, L. W.R. Co., 339 239, 242—244, 70 577, 578—580, 94 795. presents much, more, employer. Steele Louisville N.R. 323 192, 205, 226, 233, 173. district civil proceeding arising commerce protecting trade restraints monopolies.' jurisdictional provision, unlike general under' 1331, requires monetary amount. Mulford Smith, 307 38, 46, 59 648, 651, 83 1092; Turner, Dennis Lowry Lumber Chicago, M. St. P.R. 271 259, 261, 46 530, 531, 934. listed 24 him. statd t hat situated. After this, others. appears remand, conduct investigation judgment. Fifth, 2, 1188, 5, 'No carrier, officers, require person seeking employment promising *'; Fourth, 1187, 4, 'it unlawful coerce effort induce members permitted agreements, requiring, condition continued employment, sixty following beginning date whichever become (a), 1238. deduct ny fees, assessments, contributions collect assist collection text, 'not including fines penalties) uniformly acquiring retaining 'Any paragraphs Fourth Fifth section conflict herewith extent amended.' (d), 1239. Sess., 6. inserted Senator Hill Taft, Committee. 15735. reservations led 10, infra. rendition Report, Senators Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Alexander Donnell attached statement supplementary views introduce support floor amendments, inter alia, 'cause check-off conditions industry covered accord industry.' Id., 5. These three among responsible pressing version Taft-Hartley restored option desired during deliberation, found 302(c)(4) 61 157, 29 186(c)(4), 186(c)(4). 105, 80th 1st 53. quite similar Act. hearings, Hearings before Subcommittee Public Welfare, 3295, 74, 86, 94, 173, 188, 208. point. 188. few references hearings. Interstate Foreign Commerce, Representatives, H.R. 7789, 33, 91, 261. 8, supra, 6, argued: '(T)here stability relationships generally. felt resulting obligation pay slight prospect changing industry, seemed Furthermore, physical nature airline operations mandatory exceedingly cumbersome Employees single scattered thousands miles territory located isolated spots persons employed. confusion lack formal relationship union-shop arrangement; negotiate other, disposed. need subscribe checkoff; maintain standing paying personally. harmed event continue learned longer member. (c) (checkoff) subparagraph provide deductions (an specified categories) holds membership.' showing received th e refer change. meant stand own feet independent ordinarily involved.

Classification Label: 6