The U.S. Supreme Court case Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al., 1981 revolved around the issue of whether an employer's refusal to hire union workers constituted a violation of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The court held that such a refusal did not necessarily violate NLRA unless it could be proven that there was anti-union animus or discrimination involved in the decision-making process and if it had been shown to have caused an adverse effect on employee rights protected by Section 7 of NLRA. In this case, Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc., a construction company subcontractor, refused to hire employees from another firm because they were represented by a union which had previously filed unfair labor practice charges against them. The court ruled in favor of Woelke & Romero Framing stating that their actions did not infringe upon any rights under Section 7 as no evidence suggested discriminatory practices based on anti-union sentiment.

The dissenting opinion in the Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with both precedent and congressional intent. The dissenters believed that a subcontractor should not be considered an employer under Section 8(e) of the National Labor Relations Act unless it has some control over labor relations or is involved in a labor dispute itself. They pointed out that Congress intended for this provision to apply only to those who have direct control over employment conditions, which would exclude most subcontractors like Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc., from its scope. Furthermore, they contended that applying this provision too broadly could potentially disrupt normal business relationships and stifle economic growth by discouraging companies from outsourcing work to subcontractors due to fear of legal repercussions.