H. J. Heinz Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

Background\n\nAn employer at a Pittsburgh plant faced a fight between two employee organizations: the Heinz Employees Association, which many workers signed for, and the Canning and Pickle Workers Local No. 325, a union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. The union struck, a settlement provided for a Board-supervised election, and on June 8 a majority voted for the union. The employer recognized and bargained with the union but refused to put their agreement into a written contract. Before the election the union had complained to the National Labor Relations Board that the employer and its supervisors had interfered with employee organizing.\n\nReasoning\n\nThe Court addressed whether there was evidence that supervisors had coerced or discouraged workers and whether the employer could be held responsible. The Board found many supervisors had disparaged the union, threatened employees, solicited membership for the Association, and used paid work time for organizing. The Court explained that even if those acts were not directly authorized, the employer could not keep any advantage gained from them and had a duty to correct the impression once informed. The Court therefore upheld the Board’s findings of unfair labor practices, its power to order disestablishment of the employer-influenced Association, and its authority to require the employer to sign a written contract.\n\nReal world impact\n\nThe decision forces employers to stop supervisory interference and to undo advantage that improperly influenced union organization. It allows the Board to disband an employer-backed employee group when unfair conduct affected organizing. It also requires employers who reach an agreement with a union to sign a written contract to stabilize bargaining, and shows that refusal to sign can be treated as refusing to bargain.\n\n