Sheet Metal Division of Capitol District Sheet Metal, Roofing & Air Conditioning Contractors Ass'n v. Local 38 of the Sheet Metal Workers International Ass'n
208 F.3d 18 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
Facts
A collective bargaining agreement between a union (Local 38) and a contractors' association (SENY Contractors) included a clause requiring all sheet metal sketching and fabrication work within Local 38's jurisdiction to be performed by its members. Outside Contractors, who traditionally performed some of this work, sued, alleging the clause constituted an unlawful boycott under labor and antitrust laws. The district court granted a declaratory judgment for the Outside Contractors.
Issue
Did the district court err in granting a declaratory judgment that a collective bargaining agreement's "work preservation" clause, requiring local union members to perform all fabrication work within their jurisdiction, violated NLRA § 8(e) and the Sherman Antitrust Act, given unresolved factual disputes and potential legal errors?
Holding
The appellate court reversed the district court's declaratory judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings. The court found the record insufficient to support the judgment due to unresolved factual questions regarding the clause's purpose, intent to enforce, and the weight given to an NLRB determination, as well as legal errors.
Rule
Under NLRA § 8(e), a work preservation clause is lawful if it is "primary" (addressed to the contracting employer's labor relations) and aims to preserve work traditionally performed by the union's employees over which the employer has control; "secondary" agreements are prohibited. The nonstatutory antitrust exemption applies to union-employer agreements intimately related to wages, hours, and working conditions, obtained through bona fide bargaining.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.