Chapter 7 LEGALITY OF STRIKES
Labor & Employment Law 60
Case Questions
7.1, Mastro Plastics Corp. v. NLRB, p. 249
1. (Q.) What unfair labor practices did the employer commit?
(A.) The company coerced the employees into joining the union it chose (Local 318) in place
2. (Q.) Was the agreement a strike deterrent? Why?
(A.)
3. (Q.) What did the Court find as to the legality of the union conduct?
(A.) The Court sustained the NLRB conclusion that the strike had been due to the
7.2, TWA v. IFFA, p. 256
1. (Q.) The labor law governing labor disputes in the airline industry is the Railway Labor Act.
May the Supreme Court look to cases decided under the NLRA when deciding a case
under the RLA?
2. (Q.) May an employer and union reach an agreement in conjunction with the end of strike
that would displace crossovers and permanent replacements?
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 61
3. (Q.) Did the Court recognize in its decision that individual employees have a right to choose
not to strike?
(A.) Yes. One of the important aspects of the TWA
4. (Q.)
displaced by senior full-term strikers as an unlawful employer tactic destructive to the
right to strike?
(A.) No. The Supreme Court considere
7.3, Ohio Power Co. v. NLRB, p. 258
1. (Q.)
(A.) court
2. (Q.) ?
(A.)
7.4, Minnesota LPN Assn. v. NLRB, p. 261
1. (Q.)
(A.) -mail to the
2. (Q.) What were the consequences of the unsound advice from the Union in this case?
(A.) The consequences for the nurses in this case was that they engaged in a strike in
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 62
7.5, Standard Concrete Products, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 952, p. 262
1. (Q.) Wh
(A.) A sympathy strike ordinarily refers to a strike conducted by workers belonging to one
2. (Q.) Does a general no-
waiver of the right to participate in a sympathy strike?
(A.)
7.6, Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, Local 778, p. 265
1. (Q.) How did the labor dispute that led to this litigation arise?
(A.)
2. (Q.) What are the issues before the Supreme Court?
(A.) The issues before the Court are (a) whether the district court had jurisdiction under
injunction on removal of a Section 301 suit to the Federal District Court.
3. (Q.) Does the majority believe that the doctrine of stare decisis bars a reexamination of the
Sinclair decision handed down in 1962?
(A.) No. The doctrine of stare decisis (from the Latin phrase stare decisis et non quieta movere,
4. (Q.) What are the guiding principles adopted by the Court to be utilized by district courts in
determining whether to grant injunctive relief.
(A.) The principles, which are adopted from the Sinclair dissent, are as follows:
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 63
7.7, U.S. v. Pacific Maritime Association and ILA, p. 269
1. (Q.) Did the ILA prove that the invocation of the Taft-Hartley Act was the product of
(A.) The court dismissed this assertion as speculation. Moreover, the court pointed out that
2. (Q.) The 2002 case was the first case to arise primarily from a lockout by an employer. Did
the court have the right to issue a Taft-Hartley injunction not only against the lockout
but also against any future strike?
(A.) er, the
Chapter Questions and Problems, p. 271
1. (Q.) Distinguish between economic, unprotected, and employer unfair labor practice strikes.
(A.) Economic strikes are legal stoppages for the purpose of obtaining demands or better
2. (Q.) What are the reinstatement rights of economic strikers as opposed to unfair labor
practice strikers?
(A.) Employees who engage in an economic strike have protection developed from the
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 64
3. (Q.)
economic weapons.
(A.) Employers have the right to hire permanent replacement workers to fill positions
vacated by economic strikes. Moreover, it is lawful for employers to promise crossover
4. [Rights of unfair labor practice strikers, Section 7.2.] The strikers are entitled to immediate
reinstatement notwithstanding the fact that replacements have been hired. [See Section 63
5. [Boys Markets injunctions, Section 7.7.] The Supreme Court has ruled in Boys Markets, Inc. v.
Retail Clerks Union [Section 68] that the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not preclude the issuance
of all injunctions. An employer may bring an action under Section 301 of the Labor
Management Relations Act asking for an injunction to prevent or stop a union strike when
certain circumstances exist.
Boys Markets and Buffalo Forge decisions those circumstances are:
(a) There must be a strike in effect or imminent.
The Court cited the above factors first outlined in Boys Markets and Buffalo Forge in its
decision to issue an injunction halting the refusal to work overtime because:
(a) e or a limited strike as to
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 65
6. [Rights of unfair labor practice strikers, Section 7.2.] Under the principles set forth in Bonanno
Linen Service [Chapter 4, Section 4.11], the emp
prohibits an employer from withdrawing from a multiemployer association merely because
7. [Rights of economic strikers, Section 7.3.] Under the principles outlined in Great Dane Trailers,
Fleet-wood Trailers, and Laidlaw, the dismissal of Venditto and Needham is not lawful under
the NLRA. Under the Act probationary employees are subject to the same protection as
8. [Reinstatement rights of economic strikers, Section 7.3.] The NLRA, as interpreted by the
Supreme Court in Fleetwood and the NLRB in Laidlaw, requires employers to offer positions
to economic strikers who wish to return to work as vacancies become available. In this case
9. [Unprotected strike activity, Section 7.4.] Unlawful, violent activity during a lawful strike
removes an employee from the protection offered by the NLRA. As set forth in Ohio Power,
the Board must look at the entire situation and the context in which certain activities occur.
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 66
10. [Sympathy strikes, Section 7.6.] The right to strike is protected activity under Section 7 of the
NLRA. As is stated in the Kellogg
union engaged in a lawful primary strike against a mutual employer is also protected
activity. [See Section 7.6.] This right, however, as Kellogg explains, may be surrendered or
11. [Protected and unprotected strike activity, Section 7.4.] Under Section 2(3) of the NLRA a lawful
striker retains the status of an employee. Participation in an unlawful strike does not
grounds for an employer to terminate the employee [Mackay Radio]. At its inception this was
an illegal strike because one of its declared objectives was to force the employer to cease
12. [Rights of economic strikers, Section 7.3.] Permanent replacement and crossover nurses have
the right under Mackay Radio and TWA to remain in the jobs they held during the strike.
Senior strikers have no right to displace them from the jobs they performed during the
Chapter 7 Legality of Strikes
Labor & Employment Law 67
13. [Unfair labor practice strikers or economic strikers? Decertification risks when permanent
replacements are hired, Sections 7.2 and 7.3.] The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to
enforce the Board order that Pirelli Cable Corp. reinstate 154 workers and pay lost earnings
and benefits, which would have amounted to more than $8 million in liability. The Court
concluded that the Board erroneously decided that the strikers were unfair labor practice