Florida Power & Light Company v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641

PETITIONER: Florida Power & Light Company
RESPONDENT: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641
LOCATION: The Miami Herald

DOCKET NO.: 73-556
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1972-1975)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

CITATION: 417 US 790 (1974)
ARGUED: Apr 24, 1974
DECIDED: Jun 24, 1974

ADVOCATES:
Laurence J. Cohen - for respondents
Laurence Stephen Gold - for AFL—CIO, as amicus curiae, by special leave of Court
Norton J. Come - for NLRB
Ray C. Muller - for Fla

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Florida Power & Light Company v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 24, 1974 in Florida Power & Light Company v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - June 24, 1974 in Florida Power & Light Company v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641

Warren E. Burger:

The disposition of the 73-566, Florida Power and Light against International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the related case 73-795 and 73-918, Pell against Procunier and the related case 73-754, and 73-1265 Saxbe against The Washington Post will be announced by Mr. Justice Stewart.

Potter Stewart:

In 73-556, 73-795, these cases are both here on writs of certiorari to United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Section 8 (b) (1) (B) of the National Labor Relations Act, makes it an unfair labor practice for a union to restrain or coerce an employer in the selection of his representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances.

The respondent unions in these consolidated cases called economic strikes against the employer companies.

During the strikes, supervisory employees of the companies, some of whom were members of bargaining units and some of whom were not, but all of whom were union members, crossed the picket lines and performed rank and file struck work, that is work normally performed by the non-supervisory employees then on strike.

The unions later disciplined these supervisory members for so doing.

The question to be decided as whether the unions committed unfair labor practices under Section 8 (b) (1) (B) when they disciplined their supervisor members for crossing the picket lines and performing rank and file struck work, during lawful economic strikes against the companies.

We granted certiorari because this is a novel and an important question under federal labor law.

For the reasons set out at some length in the written opinion filed today, we agree with the Court of Appeals that these actions of the unions did not violate that provision of the act.

Accordingly the judgments before us are affirmed.

Mr. Justice White has filed a dissenting opinion which has been subscribed to by the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Blackmun and Mr. Justice Rehnquist.