International Protective Services, Inc.
National Labor Relations Board
339 N.L.R.B. 701 (2003)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
International Protective Services, Inc. (IPS) (defendant) provided security-guard services for various federal government buildings in Alaska pursuant to a contract with the General Services Administration (GSA). The buildings housed courts, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and other federal agencies. In the months of March and April, the buildings faced heightened security risks, particularly from bombs, due to the anniversary of an Oklahoma City bombing of a federal building. IPS guards were required to be armed, possess prior law-enforcement experience, and be specially trained in certain areas. The guards were difficult to replace without advance notice. The security guards’ union (the union) had unsuccessfully tried to negotiate a collective-bargaining agreement. The union planned to strike in March or April at the best time for the union. The union refused to disclose to GSA or GSA’s law-enforcement arm when, and sometimes the fact that, the strike would occur. The union leader, who was authorized to call a strike at any time, wanted to strike on March 23, but a few guards balked because they knew there would be a risk of harm to 50 or more military personnel then present in a building. On the morning of April 21, the union requested an urgent response from IPS to a list of contract demands and, when there was no response, began the strike at noon. Thereafter, IPS terminated the striking employees (plaintiffs). In an administrative proceeding, the administrative law judge (ALJ) found in IPS’s favor. The matter was reviewed by the National Labor Relations Board.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (No information provided)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.