Laborers District Council v. Natonal Labor Relations Board
688 F.3d 374
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Union petitions for review of NLRB order finding § 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) coercion for pressuring Lake Area to stop doing business with Century.
- Highway-Heavy pre-hire agreement allows subcontracts only to contractors signed to a written labor agreement with the Union.
- Century, a nonunion construction manager that uses union-affiliated subcontractors, bids on Minnesota fencing projects and employs no laborers.
- Lake Area formed to be a fencing subcontractor; it sought Union signatory status but planned to work with Century.
- Union refused to sign for Lake Area after learning of Century collaboration; ALJ found unlawful coercion aimed at forcing Century to unionize.
- Board affirmed ALJ; Union argued freedom of contract and that remedy improperly compelled union behavior; the court denied the petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board properly found a § 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) violation | Union contends no unlawful coercion occurred | Board held coercion through economic pressure on neutral Lake Area | Yes; Board proper in finding coercion |
| Whether freedom of contract bars the Board's remedy | Union claims right to contract; remedy impermissibly directs contracting behavior | Remedy merely requires cease and desist from unlawful coercion; no contract directive | No; remedy consistent with law and Limbach line |
| Whether the Union’s actions constituted unlawful coercion given Lake Area’s lack of 8(f) rights | Lake Area had no 8(f) rights; actions were lawful | Coercion assessed by effect on neutral employer; unlawful pressure shown | Yes; coercion found in effect and purpose |
| Whether the Board reasonably concluded the Union’s motive and effect | Motives were lawful business decisions | Motive to coerce Century via Lake Area; effect to deprive Century of subcontractors | Reasonable to conclude unlawful secondary coercion |
Key Cases Cited
- Limbach Co. v. Sheet Metal Workers Int’l Ass’n, 949 F.2d 1241 (3d Cir. 1991) (coercion includes refusing to renew or enter 8(f) contracts)
- NLRB v. Pipefitters, 429 U.S. 507 (1981) (statutory intersection with construction industry proviso)
- Brown & Root, Inc. v. Louisiana State AFL-CIO, 10 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 1994) (unlawful when lawful actions aim at prohibited secondary objective)
- Gottfried v. Sheet Metal Workers’ Int’l Ass’n, 876 F.2d 1245 (6th Cir. 1989) (unlawful to terminate for purpose of coercion)
- H.K. Porter Co. v. NLRB, 397 U.S. 99 (1970) (freedom of contract is not absolute; enforceability limited by NLRA)