Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
319 U.S. 533, 63 S.Ct. 1214, 87 L.Ed. 1568 (1943)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has the remedial authority under § 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act to require an employer to reimburse employees for dues paid to a company-dominated union, particularly when membership in that union, and the corresponding check-off of dues, was a condition of employment.
Facts:
- Virginia Electric & Power Company (the Company) had a background of anti-union activity.
- The superintendent of the Company's transportation department suggested to employees that they form their own unaffiliated organization.
- The Company facilitated meetings for employees to select representatives, which led to the formation of the Independent Organization of Employees (I.O.E.), an unaffiliated union.
- During the I.O.E.'s formative period, it held meetings on Company property, sometimes on Company time with supervisory assistance, while the Company discharged an opponent of the I.O.E. and conducted surveillance of a national union's meetings.
- The Company quickly negotiated and signed a contract with the I.O.E.
- This contract included a closed-shop provision, requiring all employees to be members of the I.O.E. to retain their jobs.
- The contract also included a check-off provision for the automatic deduction of I.O.E. dues from employees' wages, which the I.O.E. by-laws required for membership.
Procedural Posture:
- The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found Virginia Electric & Power Co. (the Company) had engaged in unfair labor practices.
- The U.S. Supreme Court previously heard the case (in 314 U.S. 469) and remanded it to the NLRB for further proceedings.
- On remand, the NLRB made new findings and issued a new order requiring the Company, among other things, to reimburse employees for dues paid to the Independent Organization of Employees (I.O.E.).
- The Company, as petitioner, sought review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which enforced the NLRB's order in full.
- The Company, as petitioner, then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging only the part of the order requiring reimbursement of union dues.
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 National Labor Relations Board have the authority under § 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act to order an employer to reimburse employees for dues that were checked-off from their wages and paid to a company-dominated union as a condition of employment?
Opinions:
Majority - Mr. Justice Murphy
Yes. The National Labor Relations Board has the authority to order an employer to reimburse employees for checked-off dues paid to a company-dominated union when such payments were coerced as a condition of employment. Section 10(c) of the Act grants the Board broad discretion to order affirmative action that will effectuate the policies of the Act. The reimbursement order is not a penalty, but a remedial measure designed to expunge the effects of the employer's unfair labor practices. By forcing employees to support an illegal, company-dominated union as a condition of employment, the Company fastened upon them the cost of defeating their own rights. Returning this money severs economic ties to the illegal union, restores to employees what was coercively taken, and helps vindicate the public policy of ensuring workers' unfettered freedom of choice in self-organization.
Concurring - Mr. Justice Frankfurter
Yes. The Board is empowered to order reimbursement because the employees had no real choice in the matter. The combination of the company's domination of the union and the closed-shop agreement meant that employees could only avoid the check-off of union dues by giving up their jobs. Because the Company's compulsion was the direct cause of the dues payments, the Board was justified in finding that the Company must make restoration to the employees.
Dissenting - Mr. Justice Roberts
No. The Board's authority is remedial, not punitive, and it cannot be used to redress private wrongs. The proper remedy for a company-dominated union is disestablishment, which the Board already ordered and which dissipates any company influence. The reimbursement order acts as an impermissible penalty against the employer, especially since the employees received benefits, such as substantial wage increases, from the union. The dues payments resulted from a contract demanded by the union, and their continuation was a matter for the employees; ordering a refund does not effectuate the policies of the Act but rather punishes the employer for past conduct.
Analysis:
This decision significantly affirms the NLRB's broad remedial authority under the National Labor Relations Act, establishing that its power to order 'affirmative action' extends to monetary remedies beyond back pay. By characterizing the reimbursement of coerced dues as remedial rather than punitive, the Court gave the Board a potent tool to counteract the formation of 'company unions.' This precedent makes it financially risky for employers to dominate a labor organization and then use a closed-shop or check-off agreement to entrench it, as they can be held liable for refunding all dues collected under such illegal arrangements.
Unlock the full brief for Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. National Labor Relations Board