In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Katz et al., 1962, the Supreme Court ruled that an employer violates Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act if they make changes to employment conditions without consulting with their employees' bargaining representative. The court held that unilateral action by an employer on a mandatory subject for collective bargaining is considered a refusal to negotiate in good faith under these sections of the Act. In this particular case, Jacob Katz, owner of a hat manufacturing company, had unilaterally changed his employee's wage rates and insurance benefits during ongoing negotiations with their union representatives. This was deemed as undermining the strength of labor organizations and infringing upon workers’ rights to engage in collective bargaining.

In the dissenting opinion for the National Labor Relations Board v. Katz et al., Justice Whittaker disagreed with the majority's ruling that unilateral changes to employment conditions by an employer during collective bargaining negotiations constituted a violation of Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act. He argued that this interpretation was overly broad and not supported by legislative history or precedent. According to him, such actions could only be considered unfair labor practices if they were intended to undermine union representation or interfere with employee rights, which he did not believe was demonstrated in this case. Furthermore, he contended that employers should retain some flexibility in managing their businesses during negotiations and warned against unduly restricting their ability to do so.