Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters

Background

A concrete company (Glacier Northwest) sued a local union representing its truck drivers after the union called a work stoppage while the company was mixing and loading large amounts of wet concrete. Some drivers returned with fully loaded trucks; others abandoned trucks on site. Glacier offloaded the material to save vehicles, but the mixed concrete hardened and became useless. Glacier sued in state court for conversion and trespass to chattels; the union argued federal labor law (the NLRA) preempted those state tort claims. The Washington Supreme Court agreed and dismissed the case.

Reasoning

The core question was whether the NLRA “arguably” protected the union’s conduct so that state courts could not hear the case. The Court emphasized that the right to strike is not absolute and that Board precedent requires strikers to take reasonable precautions against foreseeable, imminent, and aggravated danger to property. Accepting Glacier’s allegations as true, the Court concluded the union timed the walkout while concrete was being batched and deliberately directed drivers to abandon loaded trucks, creating foreseeable and imminent risk to both the concrete and trucks. Because the union had not shown its conduct was even arguably protected by federal law, state tort claims were not preempted.

Real world impact

The decision reverses the Washington Supreme Court and sends the case back for state-court proceedings. Employers may be able to pursue state tort claims when unions’ strike tactics intentionally endanger property. The Court noted a separate Board complaint exists but declined to resolve its impact here; state and Board proceedings could still proceed.

Dissents or concurrances

Three justices wrote separate opinions: some agreed with the outcome but criticized or questioned the Court’s preemption framework; one justice dissented, arguing the pending Board complaint should have required courts to pause proceedings.