NLRB v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago

Last updated

NLRB v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 30, 1978
Decided Mar 21, 1979
Full case nameNational Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago et al.
Citations440 U.S. 490 ( more )
99 S. Ct. 1313; 59 L. Ed. 2d 533;
Argument Oral argument
Case history
Prior Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals blocked enforcement of the regulations, 559 F. 2d 1112. cert. granted, 434 U.S. 1061(1978).
SubsequentNone
Holding
The National Labor Relations Board does not have the power under the Wagner Act to regulate parochial religious schools.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun  · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist  · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
MajorityBurger, joined by Stewart, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens
DissentBrennan, joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I; Public Law 74-198, 49 Stat. 449 (Wagner Act)

National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago, 440 U.S. 490 (1979), was a Supreme Court of the United States case that ruled that the National Labor Relations Board did not have the authority to regulate religious schools. The court ruled that the Wagner Act did not grant the board authority over religious schools and that even if it did, that would cause a worrying intrusion of the federal government into religion. [1] [2]

Contents

This case serves as one of the foundational pillars of the ministerial exception doctrine.

Background

In 1974 and 1975, union organizations filed petitions with the National Labor Relations Board seeking to unionize lay teachers from seven Catholic schools in the midwest, two that were directly operated by the Archbishop of Chicago and five that were operated by the Diocese of Fort Wayne-Southbend.

The schools unanimously rejected the attempt on the grounds that the board did not have the authority to do so, and that the free exercise clause protected the school from these regulations, but the board rejected their plea and ordered elections for union representatives to take place at the school.

The schools sued and sought relief from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which in a 3-0 decision, blocked the enforcement of the board's orders. The court rejected the argument from the board that the schools not being "entirely religious" organizations meant that the First Amendment did not impede them, [3] a standard the board had been using the previous two years. [4]

The board subsequently appealed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on October 30, 1978.

Court's decision

The court ruled in favor of the Catholic schools, although divided with just a 5–4 split. The argument from the majority rested on two main points: [5]

  1. The Wagner Act that established the National Labor Relations Board did not give it the power to regulate parochial religious schools and
  2. Even if it did, it would likely be unconstitutional as it would impede the schools' religious mission.

For the first point, the court looked at the legislative history of the act and concluded that it was not the intention of Congress to give the board the power to regulate parochial schools. During the debates on the act, the majority argued, it was clear the main concern was the unfair practices of private employers, not of any public entity, and the act remains silent on specifically religious institutions. The opinion cites the Taft-Hartley Act, which amended the Wagner Act to exclude non-profit hospitals from the definition of employer specifically, the standard of which could also be applied to religious schools. An amendment to the original act passed in 1974 to reinclude nonprofit hospitals in the definition was also clear in its language not to also include specifically religious hospitals. However, the court was silent on whether this ruling applies to any other kind of religious organization. [6]

For the second point, the court references the Lemon test established seven years earlier, arguing that the board's order violated it by creating an undue entanglement of the government with religion. Since "Religious authority necessarily pervades the school system.", applying these rules to the schools would violate the Free Exercise Clause.

Dissent

Justice William Brennan, joined by three others filed a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority was wrong to state it the board regulating religious schools was against the intent of the congress that originally passed the Wagner Act. Brennan stated the majority applied a way too demanding burden for determining the intent of a law that was written as broadly as the Wagner Act, saying: "The Act's wording, its legislative history, and the Court's own precedents leave 'the intention of the Congress . . . revealed too distinctly to permit us to ignore it because of mere misgivings as to power.'"

Subsequent developments

The court appeared to slightly backtrack on this case's ruling in 1985 in Tony & Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of Labor where it ruled that the Department of Labor could enforce minimum wage regulations on behalf of lay employees of religious organizations. [7]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Labor Relations Act of 1935</span> 1935 U.S. federal labor law

The National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act, is a foundational statute of United States labor law that guarantees the right of private sector employees to organize into trade unions, engage in collective bargaining, and take collective action such as strikes. Central to the act was a ban on company unions. The act was written by Senator Robert F. Wagner, passed by the 74th United States Congress, and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Labor Relations Board</span> U.S. federal government agency

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is an independent agency of the federal government of the United States that enforces U.S. labor law in relation to collective bargaining and unfair labor practices. Under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, the NLRB has the authority to supervise elections for labor union representation and to investigate and remedy unfair labor practices. Unfair labor practices may involve union-related situations or instances of protected concerted activity.

National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, 301 U.S. 1 (1937), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act. The case represented a major expansion in the Court's interpretation of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause and effectively spelled the end to the Court's striking down of New Deal economic legislation.

The National Labor Board (NLB) was an independent agency of the United States Government established on August 5, 1933, to handle labor disputes arising under the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA).

<i>The Blue Eagle at Work</i> 2005 legal treatise written by Charles J. Morris

The Blue Eagle at Work: Reclaiming Democratic Rights in the American Workplace is a legal treatise written by Charles J. Morris which analyzes collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal statute governing most private sector labor relations in the United States. Published in 2005 by Cornell University Press, the text claims that the NLRA guarantees that employees under that Act have the right to bargain collectively through minority unions—but only on a members-only basis—in workplaces where there is not an established majority union, notwithstanding that the present practice and general understanding of the law is that only majority-union employees are entitled to engage in collective bargaining on an exclusivity basis. Contracts resulting from such minority-union bargaining would apply to union members only, not to other employees.

NLRB v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., 304 U.S. 333 (1938), is a United States labor law case of the Supreme Court of the United States which held that workers who strike remain employees for the purposes of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The Court granted the relief sought by the National Labor Relations Board, which sought to have the workers reinstated by the employer. However, the decision is much better known today for its obiter dicta in which the Court said that an employer may hire strikebreakers and is not bound to discharge any of them if or when the strike ends.

Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 535 U.S. 137 (2002), is a United States labor law decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States denied an award of back pay to an undocumented worker, José Castro, who had been laid off for participating in a union organizing campaign at Hoffman Plastics Compounds plant, along with several other employees. The case was originally filed against Hoffman by Dionisio Gonzalez, an organizer with the United Steelworkers.

Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that, in a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative. The rights identified by the Court in Communications Workers of America v. Beck have since come to be known as "Beck rights", and defining what Beck rights are and how a union must fulfill its duties regarding them is an active area of modern United States labor law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">J. Warren Madden</span> American judge

Joseph Warren Madden was an American lawyer, judge, civil servant, and educator. He served as a judge of the United States Court of Claims and was the first Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board. He received the Medal of Freedom in 1947.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wilma B. Liebman</span> American lawyer and civil servant (born 1950)

Wilma B. Liebman is an American lawyer and civil servant who is best known for serving as a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). She was designated chair of the board by President Barack Obama on January 20, 2009, becoming only the second woman to lead the NLRB.

New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, 560 U.S. 674 (2010), is a U.S. labor law case of the United States Supreme Court holding that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) cannot make decisions without at least three members on a panel.

National Labor Relations Board v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corporation, 306 U.S. 240 (1939), is a United States Supreme Court case on labor laws in which the Court held that the National Labor Relations Board had no authority to order an employer to reinstate workers fired after a sit-down strike, even if the employer's illegal actions triggered that strike.

In re Labor Board, 304 U.S. 486 (1938), is a 5-to-2 decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the National Labor Relations Act requires the filing of a petition and a transcript in order for an enforcement order to proceed in federal court, and that a writ of prohibition and writ of mandamus are appropriate measures to take in quashing a petition when no transcript has been filed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Harry A. Millis</span> American economist

Harry Alvin Millis was an American civil servant, economist, and educator and who was prominent in the first four decades of the 20th century. He was a prominent educator, and his writings on labor relations were described at his death by several prominent economists as "landmarks". Millis is best known for serving on the "first" National Labor Relations Board, an executive-branch agency which had no statutory authority. He was also the second chairman of the "second" National Labor Relations Board, where he initiated a number of procedural improvements and helped stabilize the Board's enforcement of American labor law.

National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S. 513 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously ruled that the President of the United States cannot use his authority under the Recess Appointment Clause of the United States Constitution to appoint public officials unless the United States Senate is in recess and not able to transact Senate business. The Court held that the clause allows the president to make appointments during both intra-session and inter-session recesses but only if the recess is of sufficient length, and if the Senate is actually unavailable for deliberation, thereby limiting future recess appointments. The Court also ruled that any office vacancy can be filled during the recess, regardless of when it arose. The case arose out of President Barack Obama's appointments of Sharon Block, Richard Griffin, and Terence Flynn to the National Labor Relations Board and Richard Cordray as the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

National Labor Relations Board v. Yeshiva University, 444 U.S. 672 (1980), is a US labor law case, concerning the scope of labor rights in the United States.

San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236 (1959), is a United States labor law case, concerning the scope of federal preemption against state law for labor rights.

Golden State Transit Corp v City of Los Angeles, 475 U.S. 608 (1986), is a US labor law case, concerning the scope of federal preemption against state law for labor rights.

Emporium Capwell v. Western Addition, 420 U.S. 50 (1975), was a United States Supreme Court case. The court reversed and remanded the Court of Appeals ruling. The Supreme Court ruled on the basis of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA).

Sure-Tan, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 467 U.S. 883 (1984) is a United States labor law case that resulted in a split decision before the Supreme Court of the United States. By a 7-2 majority, the Court ruled that undocumented immigrant workers were “employees” covered by the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA). However, by a 5-4 majority the Court ruled that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was limited in its remedies for penalizing employers who fired undocumented workers for union organizing in violation of the NLRA. The decision was one of a series limiting the rights of immigrant workers and the power of the NLRB culminating with Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB.

References

  1. ↑ "NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. The CATHOLIC BISHOP OF CHICAGO et al". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved August 19, 2024.
  2. ↑ "National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago". Oyez. Retrieved August 19, 2024.
  3. ↑ "Catholic Bishop of Chicago v. N.L.R.B". Casetext. Retrieved August 19, 2024.
  4. ↑ Hughes, Larie L. (1981). "NLRB v. Catholic Bishop: Lay Teachers Seek More Than Good Shepherd to Protect Their Rights". Mercer Law Review. 32: 655–665.
  5. ↑ "N.L.R.B v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago" (PDF). Library of Congress. Retrieved August 19, 2024.
  6. ↑ Serritella, James E. (1980). "National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago". The Catholic Lawyer. 25: 336–339.
  7. ↑ Carter, Stephen L. (1993). The Culture of Disbelief: How American Politics and Law Trivialize Religious Devotion. Harpercollins Publishing. pp. 139. ISBN   0385474989.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.