Case Information

*1 43( OFFICE OF THE ATl.ORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

OOnClUdOd it does POt in thOW3 portions hereinafter pointed out.

Seation 1 of the Bill provldeer *HeXQaftfir, when 8 diB&Ult~ ahdLl tWi88 b8t#8@lI - elPglW3~ aad Olg~lO~OeI il3 an induetw nhloh i8 OtWMti8l to rutiOn defenre, where the am- PlOYer i8 WWating a holrpital, pub110 uatllltf, or 8~8tePD, b8fOr8 My 8tdk8 8&8U be 6 trMSQOTt~tf0~ iWZ8Eed in Of put intO MeOt br 8Uch 8np;Loy8sa, 0~ belox;.; mob 9Ji@Oyet,8 ehakl ba locked out by the wnployes, a UZFittOn uotiea ahall bs filed by auoh OX W@lOYW, a8 t&S Ua88 ItIEr be, Wit& WJ?1WW the &JWltJr Cl8rk Of the 00Unty where the isdU8t~ 18 aitUh& 68 WSU 80 Wita, the r8&3p8iltiYa SOuatg olerka of all othar oountiea in rhloh uah fndwtry OjWX8t~a it8 bLUiOslS, if eplr, aad t&9 mat8 18 affroted by 8Wh di8pUtb. Swh aotloe by thr ea- QlO 8W dlau. state that it i8 th8 pUl?QO88 Uf rtrah OLUp % ,yseS to alter Upon 8 8trikm and atate the re8&wla and densanti, end euoh notfoe byth8 10Lofrr ohall atets that it ie the purpose Of maof& Qm# Or8r UDae to OlOSe h&8 burinsaa fmd 10&t Out the mqWpw8 Sod give ths rea8oa a thareror. SJo l w& etrlka ,ahall be entered tnfn and no ruoh lo&out Uua3.L be at& erfeotiwt, untlf after the ;trpfbe oi not loasp thar l&&r &I~8 f~8l Wb tdt8l’ fih8 tUtng ai: Sri6 R4tiW or notiosr wit& the COW&~ Clerk ot County Cloek# aa hersia prorldad. Guoh aotide v&on ifl6d with the countg clmk *br31 be paat04 br bia in a publlb pl.aoe ln the anart house and 8hal.X be releaaetl to the ~reaa. be called tn +LolatL+Ba *Any atrtke whiah

of~thir eectj,on aall be eared to bs an i.~aiW “g etxl)rC, end sag lookout whioh 8hau be IYLb. in

violation or thlra rreotlon @ha&l be UOWd t0 be (111 ill.egaI, lookout, aab. anr peraoa aatfmg br hiruilfv or 68 a mnnb.rr Of aw grOUp Or =%~='tf-r w acta b aoases& aith B%%O OE POFB Othw Pw8Qn*a a0 ahall knowingly great say ikid. or aaai6t8m* ’ tQ any p*rson sDgeged in anp auoh ille@ rtrib* 03 -7 euoh- iL1eeaL lookmat, hall be ssutltr a 6 ati upon oonvlotion thereof t@mlt be &&m-r, *3 Hon. iv. 0. Reed - pagI3 3.

punished by a fine of not leea than One ThOU8md

~l,OOO.OO Dolbrrs, nor more tiban :ave Thousand 5,000.00 j Dollare, aud eaoh day 8UOh aid or lo

assistance ie oontinued shell ooastitute a separate orrennro. The provisions of thie sactlon 6hal.J. not app2.y to employees of railro8ds or the management OS r81lroade who am under tha jurf8dlation of the Federal Hailway Labor Aot.*

As a oonditian preoethat to t&t3 operation of seotion 1 ai the Bill, it i8 nao=aeary that *a d&sputa ahall ariaa between en s?dQloyer and amployea8~. The tana ?dis ta bstwomn an employer and employeaaW fa not defined. The Bi 1 doea aOt p"

pride that the dfapute between the employer and emgloyeaa ahaU be a labor dispute concerned with working hours or aan- ditiano or rates of pay, nor doe8 the Bill apsoify the number or propOrtion of emgAoyees who must be engaged in a diap@ie with the employer in order to mnkc the Bill oparativsr A8 tha I3iJ.l is now writtan a dispute betaem amployar and employees* will oonos5.vabl.y exist within the manti(s or the Aot whm an amployer numeroue employees bsooma inv0av0a in 8 diapu$e with a rolstively small number of hia employees oonoernlng a matter whioh nay or inay not have relation to working ooaM.- tionr hours, or rata8 of pey in the employer18 buelnaaa. Oa tha other hand, it mui bo plm~aibilq argued that tha Bill aon- tOI@8tlJ8 thet a dieputo i&u&4 aXi8t between an employer and

of his amployser wit&out eroeption. In therae m,apeotr 8s otion 1 oi iiou5e Sill 746, ic our opinion, in tuo vsgua, gem- era1 and indaflnlts to be valid or enforceable.

The Bill by its term8 A8 aonffned to hidWtxd.e8 %aantial to E;atiocal D&enee or Prhars the ampkJy6r ia OparS8iag a hoepital, publfo utility, ST a trt~4caportation syatam*+ ai definition is cont*ineU in the oil&l pL8 to what eoastitutea, Wtthin the waning of the Ad,, an iSldUUtry 4WWS&31 t0 &XtiO3Ial hf. en0e. I* requires no argument demonstrate that there a8D.

6d Qcms;b~ &X38 id,& % wiba diffW%IlCl‘ Of OQtlliOn QS t0 which in&uatpies 5.n Texas e-e or are not '@eSsential" ta N~ti~~l h3?nB~.' Numerous industries in Tsiterr asa oertaialg perform%3 *z-tat part8 in the Batic3nal Defense Pro&Tam but we bali*v* 00 jut&e, jwy or layman aan with eractnstm e%ate the indu%tsir8

&?A. w. 0. Reed - Page 4.

Seatton 1 es quoted rurtbsr grovider fop the “ii-

Or wPftt85 notice wfth ths County Clerk by euoh 0rqplO~n00 Or 8~~10 er @iv the 0~80 may be* for a pm-led or at least 0ixm day8 i; orem RAY nrtrilce* or *laok~ut* shall be nurd0 0rre0tlr0. Th0 tOX@8 *strike" find "lOOk0Ut" are not d0ffa0d. !&0 Bill dO00 not stata what in roswrt by the term "maah saplOy0sa Or Omployerw. cwtli0ting lnt0rpretation0 0an logi~axiy be mabe of this previiaion of t&e Bill. It ia poral~0 th0 inta7it is that only those esnployoae that apta aotirrly IA dlsputs with an e4nployer 6re rapo;tred to ril6 the or it uun a8 legloally b0 oontand& Chat tJ& porfrton ia intended tQ L'OQUbb j&& OIi@O$'fJeS *iho ~I?O~O8@ t0 ,rtdks t&3 rile notioo theraof.. SeotLoii 1 in it8 final paragreph prrovlU%les thet ary *mtPike eaxleb~ or any "lockout made" in vtolatiba or 3e0t1oA 1 rhall be deemed *an iUe(gal %trike* or an aillOgal lookout** The p~%notptmle M&a a0tualS.y bdag about anil auwg(, intko strike tar leekout ~PQ net punished. Them rho knorrU& rent any aid aeaistenoe any porsan sngFaged in mar rub i B - l-al rtrike or lookout are pMl8hm¶ bf the ail& whdah pro- vider met tk4g shall be 6U.W Of a ari8dubsanOr and upon oonrlotion shall be rlrmd not 1 08s t&en $l,OOQ.oO nQr 5Or0 than @,QQQ.OO for eaoh day SU0b Pi6 Qr 6S0i8t-00 iU OOA- tiAU4d.

xon. w. 0. Beed - Page 5.

It hao been uniior&J held that l%we, to be

v%Ud, mist rs;;ulm the &tpe treat&sat of all who are'ti like oircufaetanaer and cOAditioAs. satourr v. Btats 289 6. W. 1072, Yck Wo V. EZopkine, 118 U. 6. 356, 30 l!. kid. 22.01 COmuy V. u@Q seWer’l?UbliU Eje~+Vii~ 00.. m v, S. 54o, 46 L. a;d. 679. We believe Se&ion 1 of IIowa Bill 746 ia Toid ~6 ummrorceeble, as new dr%wn, beoauee it leaves unpunished the prlnci ~ln in R eGrike or lockout while pmridin$ aev~re punfs ent for thone who bnly ei4 L and aeeiet the prinolp%ls. Furthermore, the ctharaoter or

aid Or aosistanoe to an miploye4 or tsaployer neueasery to constitute a violation 0r t&s hot is nowhere dsrlned and is not d%finitsly rateted in the Bill. Xt is not provided thet the aid or aaeiataaos shall be in %id oi the pro- hibite strike or lcakout but apparently w rid or aesiotancs to an 0rrwuAg mnployex or 61~ loyee, whether or not it bear8 eny relation to the strike or E eokout, irr 4eeslarsd to br unlawhkl. Iuthis reepeot we believe Seotiaa 1 M.&I te define with 6uiPiolant certainty and defialtenees sop punleh- eblo arJ,bva und,aa d.rrwA, is wlttnfar0cPable.

Bectien 2 provideas "XII all e%%ee where diaputea sxiet between , employerr, end eaployoea, it ehall be uul%wit& to have tame then two (2) p4rsozu on pi&et duty et any entranoa to s plaoe bulldin& where a labor dirf i0ultt exista. ~n~r pw3f.m guilty Or violating thie ssction, or ang p6reon or 9rgaPfzatfon guilty of abettin& or aiding otihers to VloheQ thlr #eation, shell be guilty or a aied4mvmor and upon aoWo- tien thexeof 6hal.l be pashed by % tine of not lee8 than ihe Etirsd (WQ.00) DOUWS, AOr ~twe than OnQ Thouoend ($l,SOO,OO) Dollars, and 6aob dq au& violation of this motion shall 0OntiAua sh6l.l aOnrrtitUt0 A SegCWi3tB OifOAiWs” It ir observed that S60tion 2 by its tW i6 AQt ezpreeely 1Faited to iaduetslee eaeentLal Zlational Def%IWe or to ho&tale, publio utllltise end trenSpHt*tkQn efet@%er & exatioa or the fill as B whole imluding fto aap%ton Q-a not 4ntirgQ rBtpo*e d0Ubt as td induatsiee tAtQPde4 tO *6 Hon. I+‘. 0, Xeed - Pa&e 6.

be oovered fn Ss0ticm 2. The m%a,ning; 02 the teriaa “labor ,d.Wficultieaa or mdisput%r b%ta%%n employere and employees*

ie not defined. It is not ale&r whether the Dill intends to make croninal the ect,oi peaaeful picketing by all p%r%ous in 8x0666 OS two, or w$sther the Bill 1% dtiooted solely at the organization or petieon who auppliles pickets IA exeem of two in nurabsr. Xf the Bill intend% to lpeke . or&minal the aat of picket- by a3.l exoe t tuo employee%, r three pioketa whioh two employees my legduy picket? B resent, whioh one ia guilty? Bouse Bfll 746 doer not are pror de the fmewer. Or if Pleot5.an 2 ie..dlrslobed eol%ly at Ip

the organiastion furnirhlng the giokets, what is the result if nor8 than one organizetfan undertakes to oupply pioketr? I&y eaQh organization eupply two pioket8, or if a total rs&wdlese of the number of only two piokelw are permitted OP srgenieationr, whioh or@nilratioa is p%rmitted the piti- lege OZ having, two pioketr, end whiah organiaiation P 8 that privflege denied? The BIU doe% not %eyI

The right of a pewma to pioket in a peaceful mmmr a buslneee aetoblirhmatt a,t which he ir OF wail formmly employed haa reoently b,oan reannounced by the Unitad St&or Supsmu Court in three oa%e%* lirosrie8~ F%d%ration. ar hbor v. Gwhtssg,, 85 2, Ed. 313, W&man Drlv6rs ‘union vi Ysadoaioop Dairies, 85 L. Ed. 497, and Thoznhlll v+ n;labaoa, 310 U. 8. 66, & t. Xd. 209). Kn the flr%t oitod eaee, th% &Ipr~te Court had before It the queatton of the oon8titutionaUty 0f an i.njus~~Dian &o6woe of an UUnolr CquFt wh&ob in ffsat nscrd.ned the nwimberr of a Labor union Mm ~iaetullg piek~t5a& an employer*8 establimhmmt.

S’he Court in ho~diIU$ inval&d asr ~OhCf~cr of the $~w@AE Oi UpO%‘Sh the inju~otiOA %nd &a. pret%%as ek%ua%a of the ,hW#titUti@Il MidS *thn are asked to au#tgPn a deeme whioh for purporsr, oi thilr oaae aewrt8 am the eomman 3.m of a at&a that tbsre u(u1 b6 'peaO'~,hrt R%‘-+ j.ng paacaeful pereuaeioa* in selatlon *Q arUr diepute betw%%n an employee and a trade Wian ~~86 th% cungloper~*s own eapl~y%%a ar6 in contra- repay with him.

~~~blelas thrown up iby ~d%rn Isiduatry end to pre- eerve the peace 1% %xiomtticrl But not efe~ the%% era em unfettersd by the requlrerasnta kQht%. The %,aope of the Fourteenth i$g$$%.i?~ JLmsndtaent is rmt confined by the notion of a d- regarding the *ii58 @I industrial

Hon. W. 0. Bead - %'~a 7.

rant t0 their intoreaia, be barred baga&m of oowern for the eeimemlo fnteraeta againrt w&ioh Of II Union sight, without 8peoial l tatutory au$&ri~ tion by a State, m&oab lcnom the faota of a labor dispute, for freedom of a eoh la uarantsed by t&a Federal Constitution. -LA v. T&r UAC~A Layer6 Protetetiro ,OlUS 466, 478, 81 L. Icd. l229, 1236, 57 9. Qt. 857:” rupra, are to

The lieadowiwor and ThorAhill 4~olaN~a, t&i darn0 0fSeot. That ia,tkey .fia?n the rule fo be that a rtatute ootwt dmmos whioh opmratra to ditprtm on oaployoe oi shall be unlawfti for ev perron by tha u8* “Xt

Qf foroe or Vb3leAOe, or Chm@b Gf the uam Of fOXO8 OP riolens*, to attesqt prevent uky pws;ool froa engaging in any lawful voaatiun within this State.

by person guilty or riolatiag tafa reotloti shall be beand 6tdlty of % ieiOAy, snd U&WA OOAViOtfW thereof a&LA be punished by 0oniin@&eAt b the Stat8 Penitenti~ for not lees than On* (1) paw, ll0T awe than two (2) years.”

desire Our opinion on c3.l. conetitutlonal queetton8 raised by the subatenos of the Sill.

It ia 3uT 0 iniOn that tho LagisLsture i8 without Pruthor P lit, by simpb req&idng the givl.ai# oomtltutiunc;l of B 60 day r;otioe a8 cr proraqtieite the l.qgsll.ty of a @trike or lookout, to suspend the legal right of snployger, for Jwt aauso to q.Uit their eS@.o~aait SW or in grotqm, the legal r b ht of an employer, for Just @aWe, to &me hia and leak out hi8 egployeea. busimaa

In Bheohen 'vb Levy, 2L5 ti. X. 229, afrimmd 236 8. 'tl, 900, the Della Court of Civil &pp~&r $n ho&Qina that tho &%:a of e l&Or unicm ocmld not be enJolard from leaving th8 employemit et plaintitS aoidr

.~ 441

Eon. k?. 0. Reed - Pago 12.

&E’PROPED~R 21,