Hitchman Coal & Coke Co. v. Mitchell

Supreme Court of the United States · 1916 · Labor Law

245 U.S. 229 (1916)

Updated August 1, 2026

Labor Lawyellow-dog contractsnon-union mineinjunctionconcerted breach of contractunion organizingmalicious interferenceemployment at will

Facts

Hitchman operated its mine on a non-union basis under agreements with its employees that they would not belong to the United Mine Workers while employed there and that employment would end if they joined. Union officers, knowing of those terms, pursued a plan to organize enough employees secretly to shut down the mine and thereby force the company to recognize the union. Their organizer Hughes solicited employees to join while remaining at work, kept the identities of supporters secret, used deceptive statements and threats of wage reduction, and similar efforts had already shut down a nearby non-union mine. Hitchman sought an injunction to prevent interference with its employment relations and business.

Issue

Whether union officers who know an employer operates under agreements requiring employees to remain out of the union may lawfully organize those employees in secret and induce them to remain at work until enough have joined to strike and force the employer to unionize the mine. Also, whether equity may enjoin such conduct despite the fact that the employment relationships are terminable at will.

Rule

An employer has a lawful right to employ workers on the condition that they remain nonmembers of a union, and the employer is entitled to protection in the enjoyment of that employment relation even though the employment is at will. Third parties may not, with notice of such agreements, intentionally and without just cause interfere by inducing or procuring concerted breaches of the contracts of employment, or by deceptive statements and threats, for the purpose of coercing the employer into unionization; such threatened irreparable injury is enjoinable in equity.

🔒

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.

Red Mesa Quarry in Pueblo, Colorado hires stone cutters only on the understanding that they will remain outside the Rockworkers Guild while employed there, and that employment ends if they join. Guild organizers, knowing this policy, secretly enlist current workers and instruct them to stay on the job until enough have signed up to walk out together and force the quarry to recognize the Guild.

If Red Mesa seeks an injunction against the organizers, what is the strongest argument for relief?

Explanation. The majority held that an employer may lawfully condition employment on remaining outside a union and is entitled to protection in that employment relation. Third parties with notice may not intentionally procure secret, concerted breaches of those agreements to force unionization. The threatened shutdown and resulting business injury may be enjoined before the strike occurs.