Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Local Lodge No. 1424, International Association Of Machinists, Afl-cio, Et Al. v. National Labor Relations Board

• 1959 • 362 U.S. 411 • Warren Court
In the 1959 case of Local Lodge No. 1424, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of NLRB and against a union that had negotiated an agreement requiring new hires to have been members for at least one year prior to their employment date. The court held that such agreements were illegal under Section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act which prohibits employers from giving preference to...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Warren Court
Term: 1959
Docket: 44
362 U.S. 411
80 S. Ct. 822
4 L. Ed. 2d 832
1960 U.S. LEXIS 1865
Argued: Jan 11, 1960

Local Lodge No. 1424, International Association Of Machinists, Afl-cio, Et Al. v. National Labor Relations Board

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1959 case of Local Lodge No. 1424, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of NLRB and against a union that had negotiated an agreement requiring new hires to have been members for at least one year prior to their employment date. The court held that such agreements were illegal under Section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act which prohibits employers from giving preference to employees based on their tenure or status within a labor organization. The ruling was significant as it clarified what constituted unfair labor practices by unions and set precedent for future cases involving similar issues.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in the case of Local Lodge No. 1424, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board (1959) argued that the majority's decision was an overreach and misinterpretation of federal labor law. The dissenters believed that the six-month statute of limitations should apply to unfair labor practice charges filed with the NLRB under Section 10(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). They contended that this provision was intended by Congress to provide a reasonable time limit for bringing complaints while ensuring stability in industrial relations. By allowing a complaint about a collective bargaining agreement signed more than six months prior to be actionable based on its continuing effects, they argued, could potentially make every day within an ongoing contract term as new violations - which is contrary to what Congress had intended when it established Section 10(b). This interpretation would also create uncertainty and instability in labor-management relations because contracts could constantly be challenged long after they were agreed upon.

Opinion written by Justice JHarlan(2)
Decided: Apr 25, 1960
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms