The U.S. Supreme Court case Florida Power & Light Co. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641 et al., revolved around a dispute between the utility company and its unionized employees over whether certain work could be subcontracted to non-union workers. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had initially ruled in favor of the union, stating that the company's decision to subcontract was an unfair labor practice because it violated a collective bargaining agreement clause which required "all construction work" to be performed by union members unless otherwise agreed upon with the Union. However, on appeal, the Supreme Court reversed this decision in a unanimous ruling delivered by Justice Thurgood Marshall. The court held that while employers must bargain collectively about "terms and conditions of employment," they are not obligated under federal law to negotiate over decisions related to basic operations management such as contracting out for services or products needed for business operation unless these decisions have been expressly included within their collective bargaining agreements.

In the dissenting opinion for Florida Power & Light Co. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 641, et al., Justice Douglas argued that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had overstepped its authority by imposing a bargaining order on Florida Power & Light without first conducting an evidentiary hearing to determine whether such an order was necessary or appropriate. He contended that this action violated due process rights and set a dangerous precedent for future labor disputes. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's assertion that there was substantial evidence supporting the NLRB's decision; in his view, there were significant factual discrepancies in the case record which should have been resolved through further investigation before any binding orders were issued.