Unite Here Local 355 v. Mulhall
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Nov 13, 2013
|Dec 10, 2013||TBD||Per Curiam||OT 2013|
Issue: Whether an employer and union may violate Section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 186, by entering into an agreement under which the employer exercises its freedom of speech by promising to remain neutral to union organizing, its property rights by granting union representatives limited access to the employer’s property and employees, and its freedom of contract by obtaining the union’s promise to forego its rights to picket, boycott, or otherwise put pressure on the employer’s business.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Dismissed as improvidently granted in a per curiam opinion on December 10, 2013. Justice Breyer wrote a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor and Kagan joined.
- Opinion analysis: Union organizing lives to fight another day -- but so do its opponents (William Gould)
- The Court ponders labor neutrality: More Justice Kennedy scale-tipping? (William Gould)
- Argument preview: Unite or disunite – another roadblock to union organizing and collective bargaining? (William Gould)
- Petition of the day (Ben Cheng)