Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Labor Law

Labor Lawcollective bargainingretiree benefitsmandatory subjects of bargainingNLRALMRASection 8(a)(5)Section 8(a)(1)

Facts

The Union represented an hourly employee bargaining unit at the Company's Barberton, Ohio plant, and over time the parties negotiated health insurance arrangements that also covered retired employees. In 1966, after Medicare was enacted, the Company refused the Union's request to bargain mid-term over supplemental coverage for retirees and instead mailed letters to retirees offering them an individual choice to withdraw from the negotiated private plan and receive a $3 monthly Company contribution toward supplemental Medicare premiums. Fifteen of 190 retirees accepted the offer. The Board found this was an unlawful unilateral change, but the relevant facts were essentially undisputed.

Issue

Whether an employer may deal individually with already retired former employees about changes to their retirement health benefits, or instead must bargain collectively with the union because such changes are mandatory subjects under Section 8(a)(5).

Rule

Under Section 8(a)(5), an employer must bargain collectively only with the representatives of his employees, subject to Section 9(a), which limits representation to employees in an appropriate bargaining unit. Persons who have retired from the employer's service are no longer the employer's employees and are not within the bargaining unit, so an employer has no statutory duty to bargain with the union over improvements or alterations in retirees' benefits after retirement.

🔒

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.

Riverbend Metals operates a plant in Toledo, Ohio, where Forge Workers Local 18 represents hourly production employees. After several former employees had been retired for years, Riverbend mailed them optional enrollment forms offering a new prescription-drug subsidy in place of part of an older retiree medical arrangement, and it refused the union's demand to bargain first.

Did Riverbend most likely commit an unfair labor practice by refusing to bargain with the union before making the offer to the retirees?

Explanation. The majority held that Section 8(a)(5) requires bargaining only with the representatives of the employer's employees, subject to Section 9(a)'s unit limitation. Persons who have already retired are no longer employees in the bargaining unit, so post-retirement alterations or improvements in their benefits are not mandatory subjects of bargaining with the union. The result does not turn on whether the proposed change is favorable or unfavorable.