Leedom v. Kyne

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

Labor LawNLRB representation proceedingsjudicial reviewNLRASection 9(b)(1)Section 9(d)Section 10professional employees

Facts

The Board certified a bargaining unit consisting of 233 admittedly professional employees and 9 admittedly nonprofessional employees. The Engineers Association had sought to represent the professionals, but objected to the inclusion of the nonprofessionals. The Board included the 9 nonprofessionals because they shared a close community of employment interest with the professionals and would not destroy the unit's predominantly professional character. No majority vote of the professional employees was taken in favor of inclusion with the nonprofessionals.

Issue

Whether a district court may grant equitable relief setting aside an NLRB certification when the Board included nonprofessional employees in a unit with professional employees without the majority vote required by § 9(b)(1), despite the Board's argument that review is available only through a later § 10 proceeding.

Rule

Although Board representation determinations generally are not reviewable in an original equity suit in district court, equitable review is available where there is a showing of unlawful Board action and resulting injury by departure from statutory requirements or due process. When § 9(b)(1) expressly forbids inclusion of professional and nonprofessional employees in the same unit unless a majority of the professionals vote for inclusion, the Board has no discretion to deny that statutory protection, and district court relief is proper if ordinary § 10 review is too remote and conjectural to provide an adequate remedy.

🔒

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, the National Labor Relations Board certifies a bargaining unit at Lakefront Systems Works that includes 41 licensed chemists and 6 shipping clerks. The chemists objected to the mixed unit, but the Board concluded the clerks share a close community of employment interest with the chemists and that the unit remains predominantly professional. No separate vote of the chemists was held.

If the chemists' association files suit in federal district court to set aside the certification, what is the strongest argument for jurisdiction?

Explanation. District court equitable review may be available when there is unlawful Board action and resulting injury by departure from a statutory requirement or due process. The majority distinguished ordinary unit determinations based on Board expertise from a certification that contravenes the express command that professionals and nonprofessionals may not be placed together unless a majority of the professionals vote for inclusion. In that circumstance, the professionals' denial of the statutory protection itself is injury, and ordinary § 10 review may be too remote and conjectural. (Derived from Leedom v. Kyne (n.d.).)