White v. NLRB

During collective-bargaining sessions with its employees’ union representative, White’s Uvalde Mines (White) (defendant) insisted on including a no-strike clause in the employees’ contract. No-strike clauses were traditionally accompanied by contractual provisions specifying that the parties would settle disputes through grievance procedures and arbitration, but White wanted the contract to specify that any arbitration had to be decided in White’s favor as long as White’s position was not arbitrary or capricious. White initially refused to include a corresponding no-lockout clause that prohibited White from locking out or withholding work from employees. Although White eventually agreed to insert the no-lockout clause into the contract, White resisted any provision that would hold White liable for breaching the clause. White’s desired contract left the union without the ability to bargain over wages, merit increases, working conditions, house-rental rates for employees, physical examinations of employees, and bonuses. Effectively, the contract White was willing to sign was one that would leave union-represented employees in the same position as if they had no contract. The union asserted that White had not bargained in good faith and began a strike. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that the strike was an unfair-labor-practice strike based on White’s failure to bargain in good faith. The NLRB also found that White had violated § 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act by threatening to destroy the union, threatening to fire striking employees, and promising to give employees raises if they broke the strike or helped in the union’s destruction. The NLRB also found that White had violated §§ 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) by unilaterally giving some employees merit-based pay increases before any negotiations with the employees’ bargaining representative. White petitioned a federal appellate court to set aside the NLRB’s orders, and the NLRB cross-petitioned for enforcement. The court held that the NLRB had appropriately found a § 8(a)(1) violation based on the threats but that the unilateral pay increases did not violate §§ 8(a)(1) and (a)(5). The court then considered whether White’s conduct during the negotiations constituted a failure to bargain in good faith.