holding that an employer cannot grant discretionary pay increases prior to impasse without bargaining with the union over their size
How later courts described this case
- holding that an employer cannot grant discretionary pay increases prior to impasse without bargaining with the union over their size
- noting that courts must afford appropriate deference to the Board's expertise in "applying the general provisions of the Act to the complexities of industrial life"
- noting that “[t]he employer ... must be held to intend the very consequences which foreseeably and inescapably flow from his actions”
- upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because “[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Mr. Justice Harlan,
concurring.
I agree with the Court that the Board’s conclusions respecting this 20-year “superseniority” plan were justified without inquiry into the respondents’ motives. However, I do not think that the same thing would necessarily be true in all circumstances, as for. example with a plan providing for a much shorter period of extra seniority. Being unsure whether the Court intends to hold that the Board has power to outlaw all such plans, irrespective of the employer’s motives and other circumstances, or only to sustain its action in the particular circumstances of this case, I concur in the judgment.