National Labor Relations Board v. Denver Building & Construction Trades Council
Headline: Labor council’s picketing to force a contractor to drop a subcontractor is ruled an illegal secondary boycott, the Court upholds the NLRB order and limits unions’ ability to force business cutoffs nationwide.
Holding: The Court held that the unions’ strike and picketing to force a general contractor to drop a subcontractor was an unfair labor practice under the law banning actions that force businesses to stop dealing with others.
- Makes picketing to force contractors to drop subcontractors unlawful.
- Gives the NLRB power to order an end to such secondary boycotts.
- Limits unions’ use of strikes to change other businesses’ commercial relationships.
Summary
Background
A Denver construction workers’ council and its affiliated unions objected to a subcontractor that used nonunion electricians on a building job. The council ordered its members off the site and placed a picket there from January 9 to January 22 to declare the job "unfair." The general contractor then told the subcontractor to leave the job and the union workers returned. The subcontractor filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board, which found the unions had sought to force the contractor to cease doing business with the subcontractor and ordered them to stop.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the unions’ strike aimed to force one business to stop dealing with another — conduct the law outlaws as a secondary boycott. The Board found that forcing the contractor to terminate the subcontract was at least one object of the picketing. The Court accepted that finding, agreed the activity affected interstate commerce based on the subcontractor’s out-of-state purchases, and held the picket was a signal to union members amounting to direction to strike rather than protected speech.
Real world impact
The decision makes it unlawful for unions to use picketing or strikes to force a contractor to drop a subcontractor, and it strengthens the NLRB’s ability to stop such secondary boycotts. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and sent the case back for proceedings consistent with this ruling.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Douglas (joined by Justice Reed) dissented, arguing the union was protecting union men working on the same job and that the presence of a subcontractor should not convert a primary protest into an illegal secondary boycott.
Opinions in this case:
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?