Labor Law - Collective Bargaining - Union\u27s Unprotected Harassing Activites as a Refusal to Bargain in Good Faith

While bargaining for a new contract, the union announced that it would engage in a work-without-contract program designed to harass the insurance company employer into accepting its demands, in the event that no agreement was reached prior to the expiration of the existing contract. When that contingency occurred, the program was instituted consisting of such activities as refusing to write new business for a period, refusing to do customary duties, engaging in sit-in mornings, soliciting policyholder support against the company, and mass demonstrations at the company\u27s home office. The union continued to attend bargaining sessions, but it informed its members in a directive that ... a satisfactory contract will be won in the field and not at the bargaining table. The company thereupon charged the union with a refusal to bargain in good faith in violation of section 8 (b) (3) of the Taft-Hartley amendment. The National Labor Relations Board rejected the Trial Examiner\u27s recommendation to dismiss and entered a cease and desist order against the union. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia unanimously refused to enforce the order. On certiorari to the Supreme Court, held, affirmed, three justices dissenting. Where a union\u27s conduct at the bargaining table is in apparent good faith, its concurrent use of extrinsic economic weapons to force acceptance of its demands is not inconsistent with good faith bargaining. NLRB v. Insurance Agents\u27 lnternational Union, AFL-CIO, (U.S. 1960) 80 S.Ct. 419