|
|
Labor Board v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9 (1962)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Labor Board v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9 (1962)
National Labor Relations Board v. Washington Aluminum Co. No. 464 Argued April 10, 1962 Decided May 28, 1962 370 U.S. 9
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Respondent is a manufacturer subject to the National Labor Relations Act. After several of the eight nonunion employees in its machine shop had complained individually about the coldness of the shop during the winter, seven of them walked out together on an extraordinarily cold day, saying that it was "too cold to work." Respondent discharged them for violating a rule forbidding any employee to leave without permission of the foreman. The National Labor Relations Board found that they had acted in concert in protest against respondent’s failure to provide adequate heat in their place of work, and that their discharge violated § 8(a)(1) of the Act by interfering with their right under § 7 to act in concert for mutual aid or protection, and it ordered respondent to reinstate them with back pay.
Held: the Board correctly interpreted and applied the Act to the circumstances of this case, and the Court of Appeals should have enforced its order. Pp. 10-18.
(a) These employees did not lose their right under § 7 to engage in concerted activities merely because they did not present a specific demand upon their employer to remedy a condition they found objectionable. Pp. 14-15.
(b) The walkout involved here grew out of a "labor dispute" within the meaning of § 2(a) of the Act. Pp. 15-16.
(c) The fact that respondent had an established rule forbidding employees to leave their work without permission of the foreman was not justifiable "cause" for their discharge within the meaning of § 10(c). Pp. 16-17.
291 F.2d 869 reversed.
Contents:
Chicago:
U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Labor Board v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9 (1962) in 370 U.S. 9 370 U.S. 10. Original Sources, accessed July 30, 2025, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9Z2FUWGUCEWLCPV.
MLA:
U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Labor Board v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9 (1962), in 370 U.S. 9, page 370 U.S. 10. Original Sources. 30 Jul. 2025. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9Z2FUWGUCEWLCPV.
Harvard:
U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Labor Board v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9 (1962). cited in 1962, 370 U.S. 9, pp.370 U.S. 10. Original Sources, retrieved 30 July 2025, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9Z2FUWGUCEWLCPV.
|