From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
General Building Contractors Association v. Pennsylvania
United States Supreme Court
458 U.S. 375, 102 S.Ct. 3141 (1982)
Local 542 of the International Union of Operating Engineers (the Union) (defendant) maintained collective bargaining agreements with construction industry employers (defendants) requiring that the employers hire operating engineers only from among those referred by the Union. The Union referred these operating engineers from lists that classified the engineers according to their recent construction experience. Engineers could only gain access to the lists by participating in an apprenticeship program administered by the Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee (JATC). These workers were prohibited from seeking work with employers who were parties to the collective bargaining agreements except through the Union’s referrals. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania) (plaintiff) and a class of racial minorities seeking work as operating engineers (plaintiffs) sued the Union and the employers who were parties to the collective bargaining agreements, alleging that the exclusive hiring arrangement was being operated in a racially discriminatory manner. The district court ruled that the Union and the JATC was being administered in a racially discriminatory manner. The district court ruled that the signatory employers were not aware of the discrimination but had violated the applicable statutes. Based on this, the district court ordered injunctive relief against the employers, requiring that the employers meet detailed minority utilization goals and submit detailed quarterly reports describing the extent of their compliance with the district court’s order. The employers were also ordered to share in the financial cost of implementing the overall remedial decree. The employers appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which affirmed. The employers then petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)
Concurrence (O’Connor, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.