In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Wyman-Gordon Co., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wyman-Gordon Company, a manufacturer that refused to provide detailed information about its financial status to a labor union during collective bargaining negotiations. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had previously ordered the company to disclose this information, arguing it was necessary for effective negotiation. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with NLRB's decision and held that an employer is not required by law under Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act to furnish such specific data unless there are doubts about their ability to pay increased wages or other benefits demanded by employees' representatives during collective bargaining sessions. This ruling clarified employers' obligations regarding disclosure of financial details in labor negotiations.

In the dissenting opinion for the National Labor Relations Board v. Wyman-Gordon Co., Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of administrative law and labor relations policy. He contended that it undermined the authority of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by requiring it to disclose its informants, which could deter future whistleblowers from coming forward with information about unfair labor practices. Furthermore, he disagreed with treating NLRB investigations like criminal proceedings where full disclosure is required; instead, he believed they should be treated more akin to preliminary inquiries where some level of secrecy is necessary for effectiveness. Lastly, Justice Douglas expressed concern over how this ruling might impact other federal agencies' ability to conduct confidential investigations.