Brooks v. NLRB
99 L. Ed. 2d 125, 75 S. Ct. 176 (1954)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An employer must bargain with a union certified after a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election for a reasonable period, typically one year, even if the union loses its majority support shortly after certification due to employee disaffection not caused by the employer.
Facts:
- The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) conducted a representation election at a Chrysler-Plymouth agency owned by the petitioner, Brooks.
- District Lodge No. 727, International Association of Machinists, won the election by a vote of eight to five.
- The NLRB certified the union as the exclusive bargaining representative on April 20, 1951.
- One week after the election and one day before the official certification, Brooks received a handwritten letter.
- The letter was signed by nine of the thirteen employees in the bargaining unit, a clear majority.
- The letter stated that the employees were not in favor of being represented by the union.
- Relying on this letter, Brooks refused to bargain with the newly certified union.
Procedural Posture:
- The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that Brooks, the petitioner-employer, committed an unfair labor practice for refusing to bargain with the certified union.
- The NLRB issued an order compelling Brooks to bargain with the union.
- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the intermediate appellate court, granted the NLRB's petition to enforce its order.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the circuit courts on this issue.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an employer commit an unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act by refusing to bargain with a union that was recently certified by the NLRB, based on evidence received shortly after the election that the union has lost its majority support?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Frankfurter
Yes. An employer commits an unfair labor practice by refusing to bargain with a recently certified union, even when presented with evidence that the union has lost the support of a majority of employees. The Court reasoned that the NLRB's rule requiring an employer to honor a certification for a reasonable period, ordinarily one year, promotes industrial stability and gives the collective-bargaining relationship a fair chance to succeed. The integrity of the secret-ballot election process would be undermined if informal expressions of disaffection, like a letter, could immediately overcome the formal election result. Such a practice would encourage employers to delay bargaining in hopes that union support would erode. The Taft-Hartley Act's provisions for decertification elections after one year provide the appropriate, formal mechanism for employees to reject their union, reinforcing the policy of giving a newly certified union a period of repose.
Analysis:
This decision firmly establishes the 'certification-year bar' doctrine, creating an irrebuttable presumption of a union's majority status for one year following its certification. The ruling prioritizes the stability of the collective bargaining process and the finality of NLRB elections over an employer's right to immediately challenge a union's majority status based on informal evidence. It forces employers and dissatisfied employees to use the formal procedures established by the NLRA, such as decertification petitions, rather than resorting to 'self-help' by withdrawing recognition. This precedent significantly strengthens a union's position in its first year, insulating it from challenges while it attempts to negotiate an initial contract.
Unlock the full brief for Brooks v. NLRB