National Labor Relations Board v. Wyman-Gordon Co. case brief
summary
394 U.S. 759 (1969)
CASE FACTS
The district court order directing the employer to provide a list of employees was based on the NLRB's Excelsior rule. The Excelsior rule purported to establish the general principle that a list of employees eligible to vote in a union election be provided to the union within seven days after an election was approved.
DISCUSSION
OUTCOME
The decision that reversed the order requiring the employer to comply with the board's subpoena and provide an employee list to the union was overturned and the matter was remanded to the district court so its judgment could be reinstated.
Recommended Supplements for Administrative Law Examples & Explanations: Administrative Law, Fourth Edition
Administrative Law and Process: In a Nutshell (Nutshell Series)
394 U.S. 759 (1969)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioner National Labor Relations
Board (NLRB) brought an action against respondent employer to enforce
a subpoena for a list of employees eligible to vote in a union
election. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
reversed the decision that directed the employer to comply with the
subpoena, as it was based on a rule that was not promulgated in
accordance with statutory requirements. The NLRB petitioned for
certiorari.CASE FACTS
The district court order directing the employer to provide a list of employees was based on the NLRB's Excelsior rule. The Excelsior rule purported to establish the general principle that a list of employees eligible to vote in a union election be provided to the union within seven days after an election was approved.
DISCUSSION
- The United States Supreme Court held that the Excelsior rule was invalid, as it was not promulgated in accordance with applicable administrative laws, but that the employer was nevertheless required to produce the employee list because it was specifically directed to do so by the NLRB in an adjudicatory proceeding. The NLRB did not have discretion to promulgate rules in adjudicatory proceedings without complying with the established statutory requirements.
- The NLRB's mandate to provide the employee list was nevertheless valid, as it was part of an order in a pending case that the employer was required to obey.
- The disclosure requirement was substantively valid, and the NLRB was authorized to subpoena employee lists because they were "evidence" within the meaning of § 11 (29 U.S.C.S. § 161) of the National Labor Relations Act.
OUTCOME
The decision that reversed the order requiring the employer to comply with the board's subpoena and provide an employee list to the union was overturned and the matter was remanded to the district court so its judgment could be reinstated.
Recommended Supplements for Administrative Law Examples & Explanations: Administrative Law, Fourth Edition
Administrative Law and Process: In a Nutshell (Nutshell Series)
No comments:
Post a Comment