Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. v. Norris
512 U.S. 246, 1994 U.S. LEXIS 4670, 129 L. Ed. 2d 203 (1994)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The Railway Labor Act (RLA) does not pre-empt state-law causes of action that involve rights and obligations existing independently of a collective-bargaining agreement (CBA). A state-law claim is independent of a CBA if its resolution does not require interpretation of the agreement's terms.
Facts:
- Grant Norris was a licensed aircraft mechanic employed by Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. (HAL), and his employment was governed by a collective-bargaining agreement (CBA).
- During a preflight inspection, Norris identified a damaged axle sleeve on a plane's landing gear, which he considered a safety hazard, and recommended its replacement.
- Norris's supervisor rejected the recommendation and instead ordered the sleeve to be sanded and returned to the plane.
- Norris refused to sign the maintenance record to certify that the repair was performed satisfactorily and that the airplane was fit to fly.
- His supervisor immediately suspended him for this refusal.
- After being suspended, Norris reported the safety issue to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
- HAL subsequently held a termination hearing and fired Norris for insubordination.
Procedural Posture:
- Grant Norris filed two lawsuits in Hawaii Circuit Court (state trial court) against Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. (HAL) and several of its officers.
- HAL removed the first case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, which remanded the state-law tort claims back to state court.
- The Hawaii state trial court dismissed Norris's claims in both lawsuits, holding they were pre-empted by the Railway Labor Act (RLA).
- Norris appealed the dismissals to the Supreme Court of Hawaii.
- The Supreme Court of Hawaii reversed the trial courts' judgments, concluding that the RLA did not pre-empt Norris's state tort actions.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the decision of the Supreme Court of Hawaii.
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 the Railway Labor Act pre-empt an airline mechanic's state-law claims for wrongful discharge when those claims are based on rights that exist independently of the collective-bargaining agreement?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Blackmun
No. The Railway Labor Act does not pre-empt state-law causes of action that are independent of the collective-bargaining agreement. The RLA's mandatory arbitration for 'minor disputes' applies only to disputes that are grounded in the CBA, meaning those that require the interpretation or application of the CBA for their resolution. The Court formally adopts the pre-emption standard from the Labor-Management Relations Act case, Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., for RLA cases. Under this standard, a state-law claim is not pre-empted if it turns on a 'purely factual question' about the employee's conduct and the employer's motive, rather than on the meaning of a contractual provision. Norris's state-law claims for retaliatory discharge and violation of public policy arise from state law, not the CBA, and resolving them requires a factual inquiry into HAL's motive, not an interpretation of the CBA's 'just cause' provision.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies and narrows the pre-emptive scope of the Railway Labor Act's dispute resolution mechanism. By aligning the RLA's pre-emption standard with that of the Labor-Management Relations Act, the Court created a uniform framework for labor law pre-emption. The ruling empowers employees in the airline and railroad industries to seek state-law remedies for wrongful discharge and other torts, provided their claims are based on rights conferred by state law rather than derived from their collective-bargaining agreement. This ensures that the RLA's goal of resolving contract disputes through arbitration does not strip workers of substantive, non-negotiable rights and protections provided by the states.
