NLRB v. Washington Aluminum Co.

Supreme Court of the United States · 1962 · Labor Law

Labor LawConcerted ActivitySection 7Unfair Labor PracticeNLRASection 7Section 8(a)(1)Section 10(c)

Facts

Seven machinists on the day shift worked in an uninsulated machine shop that had long been the subject of complaints about cold working conditions. On an exceptionally cold day, the shop was bitterly cold because the main oil furnace had broken down, and after discussing the conditions among themselves, six workers joined Caron in walking out shortly after the 7:30 buzzer in hopes of getting heat brought into the plant. The company president, upon learning of the walkout, ordered their discharge that morning. The Board found that the walkout was a concerted protest over inadequate heat and that the discharges violated the Act.

Issue

Whether unorganized employees who leave work together to protest intolerably cold working conditions lose NLRA § 7 protection because they did not first present a specific demand to the employer or because they violated a plant rule against leaving work without permission. Also, whether the employer could treat the walkout as dischargeable "cause" under § 10(c).

Rule

Section 7 protects employees' concerted activities undertaken for mutual aid or protection whether they occur before, after, or at the same time as a specific demand to the employer. A concerted walkout over working conditions may constitute a labor dispute within § 2(9), and an employer may not rely on a plant rule or on § 10(c) "for cause" language to discharge employees for engaging in otherwise protected concerted activity, so long as the activity is not unlawful, violent, in breach of contract, or otherwise unprotected.

🔒

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.

At a nonunion cabinet shop in Toledo, six assemblers had complained informally for weeks about fumes from a malfunctioning ventilation system. One afternoon, after discussing the haze and headaches among themselves, they left the production floor together without first making a new demand that day, hoping management would fix the ventilation. The owner fired them that evening for walking off the job.

If the employees file an unfair labor practice charge, which is the strongest argument that their walkout was protected under federal labor law?

Explanation. Section 7 protects concerted activities for mutual aid or protection whether they occur before, after, or at the same time as a specific demand. The majority rejected any rule requiring unorganized employees to make a prior specific demand before acting together over working conditions. Because these employees acted collectively to improve ventilation, the absence of a same-day formal demand does not defeat protection.