Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Associated Press v. National Labor Relations Board

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawLabor LawArbitrationAdministrative LawNLRBSpielbergCollyerarbitration

Facts

After collective bargaining between Associated Press and the Wire Service Guild broke down, the prior contract expired and there was no collective bargaining agreement in effect from January 8 to January 15, 1969, during a strike. During that hiatus, many employees crossed the picket line, resigned from the Guild, and attempted to revoke dues-checkoff authorizations; the Guild asserted the revocations were untimely or ineffective under the authorization forms and demanded dues from AP. AP refused to remit the dues and resisted arbitration, but a district court compelled arbitration. The arbitrator concluded that the authorizations survived contract expiration, that most revocations were not timely under the authorization terms, and that some timely revocations were ineffective because the employees had not given notice to both AP and the Guild as required.

Issue

Whether the NLRB acted within its discretion by deferring to the arbitrator's award under Spielberg and by withholding decision on unresolved revocation disputes pending further arbitration or amicable settlement under Collyer. Relatedly, whether the arbitrator's interpretation of Section 302(c)(4) was so repugnant to the National Labor Relations Act that Board deferral was improper.

Rule

The NLRB may, in its discretion, dismiss unfair labor practice complaints in favor of an arbitration award when the arbitration proceedings were fair and regular and the award is not clearly repugnant to the purposes and policies of the National Labor Relations Act. The Board may also defer present consideration of unresolved contractual disputes where the parties' agreement provides grievance or arbitration machinery, while retaining jurisdiction to reconsider if the dispute is not promptly resolved, if the procedures are not fair and regular, or if the result is repugnant to the Act.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Cleveland, Prairie Ledger Media and Local 58 had a collective bargaining agreement requiring arbitration of disputes over payroll deduction authorizations. After a dispute arose, both sides appeared before a neutral arbitrator, submitted documents, examined witnesses, and received a written award rejecting the employer's interpretation. The employer then pressed an unfair labor practice charge before the Board based on the same underlying dispute.

What is the strongest basis for the Board to dismiss the charge in favor of the arbitral award?

Explanation. The majority approved Board discretion under Spielberg to dismiss an unfair labor practice complaint when the same issue was resolved in arbitration, so long as the proceedings were fair and regular and the result was not clearly repugnant to the purposes and policies of the Act. The Board is not required to find the arbitrator's interpretation the best one, only that it is not clearly inconsistent with the Act.