Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Scofield v. National Labor Relations Board

394 U.S. 423 (1969)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...

Scofield v. National Labor Relations Board

United States Supreme Court

394 U.S. 423 (1969)

Facts

The United Auto Workers (UAW) represented Wisconsin Motor Corporation’s production employees. The company paid “piecework” or incentive rates based on each worker’s production. The labor contract set a minimum hourly “machine rate” reflecting a reasonable average pace, which faster workers could exceed, but the union set a production “ceiling” for members to protect rest periods. Members who exceeded the ceiling could “bank” the extra to apply during slower pay periods. If the member wanted immediate pay for overages, the union fined the member. Over the years the parties negotiated machine and ceiling rates to gradually increase the allowable margin. But the union refused to eliminate the ceiling altogether, concerned that competitive pressure would lower piecework rates, making workers work harder for little more, harming their health, causing jealousy, and ultimately reducing the workforce. The union checked company records for compliance, and the parties used ceiling rates to calculate piece-rate increases and settle grievances. In 1961, the union fined Russell Scofield and several other workers (defendants) from $50 to $100 each (plus a one-year suspension) and sued to collect the fines. General counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) (plaintiff) charged the union with unfair labor practices, but the trial examiner, NLRB, and appellate court rejected the charges. The Supreme Court granted review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning

What to do next…

  1. 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 517,000 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
  2. 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 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 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.

Questions and answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 22,300 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership