In the 1972 case National Labor Relations Board v. Boeing Co., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Boeing, overturning a decision by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB had found that Boeing violated federal labor law by refusing to bargain with two separate unions representing its employees at different locations within one plant. However, the Supreme Court held that under Section 9(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, it was not necessary for an employer to negotiate with more than one union within a single bargaining unit if they did not wish to do so. This ruling clarified and limited employers' obligations regarding collective bargaining units and reinforced their right to refuse multi-union negotiations within a single unit.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. BOEING CO., it was argued that Boeing had not violated any labor laws by refusing to bargain with a union over its decision to subcontract work, as claimed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The dissenting justices believed that this matter fell within management prerogatives and did not require collective bargaining. They contended that while employers must negotiate about changes affecting employees' wages, hours or working conditions, they are under no obligation to discuss decisions related primarily to basic operational concerns like production location or methods. Therefore, in their view, Boeing's refusal did not constitute an unfair labor practice because subcontracting is fundamentally a managerial decision rather than one concerning 'terms and conditions of employment'. This interpretation would limit NLRB’s jurisdiction over business decisions which indirectly affect employment terms but are essentially part of company policy-making.