Virginian Railway v. System Federation No. 40
United States Supreme Court
300 U.S. 515 (1937)
- Written by Patricia Peters, JD
Facts
In 1927, the American Federation of Labor (AFL) formed a local union, System Federation No. 40 (the federation) (plaintiff) to represent the employees of the Virginian Railway (the railway) (defendant). In 1934, the federation demanded that the railway recognize the federation as the authorized representative of the railway’s employees. The federation requested the aid of the National Mediation Board (NMB), which had been formed under the Railway Labor Act. After holding an election, the NMB certified the federation as the authorized representative of the railway’s employees. After the railway refused to negotiate with the federation, the federation sued the railway in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to compel the railway to recognize and negotiate with the federation. The federation argued that a 1934 amendment to the Railway Labor Act, which required railroads to “treat with” (recognize and confer with) certified union representatives, obligated the railway to negotiate with the federation. In response, the railway argued that this requirement was (1) not intended by Congress to be enforced, (2) not enforceable, since parties cannot be compelled to agree, and (3) not constitutional under the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. The district court ordered the railway to negotiate with the federation regarding rules, wages, and working conditions and prohibited the railway from creating a company union that would interfere with the federation. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decree. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stone, J.)
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. 46,400 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.