Supreme Court Holds Employers Can Sue For Strike Damages

• Jurisdiction: United States,Federal
• Law Firm: Littler Mendelson
• Subject Matter: Employment and HR, Environment, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Employee Rights/ Labour Relations, Environmental Law, Trials & Appeals & Compensation
• Author: Mr Samuel Wiles and Kathryn Siegel
• Published date: 19 June 2023

• The Supreme Court in Glacier Northwest v. Teamsters held that the NLRA does not preempt state law tort claims for property damage resulting from a strike when the strikers fail to take "reasonable precautions" to protect employer property.
• This decision slightly restricts the right to strike by obliging striking unions to mitigate or eliminate risk of harm to employer property, especially when perishable products are involved.

On June 1, 2023, in Glacier Northwest v. Teamsters, the United States Supreme Court ruled for the employer in a case with significant implications for the right of unions to strike and the right of employers to respond to strikes with court actions for damages.

In Glacier, the Court addressed whether the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA" or the "Act") "preempts an employer's state tort claim against a union for property damage that allegedly occurred because workers failed to take reasonable precautions to protect the employer's property before going on strike." The Court held that the NLRA does not preempt state law tort claims alleging intentional destruction of property, particularly where the union fails to take reasonable precautions to protect against foreseeable and imminent harm.

Background

Glacier Northwest, a concrete seller and supplier, prepares, mixes, and delivers concrete by, among other ways, loading it in trucks for delivery and pouring the same day. Failure to deliver the loaded concrete timely causes it to harden, rendering it unusable and the trucks it is stored in inoperable. Mitigating these effects is difficult because dumping concrete "at random" would create an environmental hazard.

Glacier's truck drivers were represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No. 174 ("Union") with whom Glacier was engaged in collective bargaining negotiations. Per the Complaint, the Union ordered Glacier's delivery drivers to strike right after concrete had been freshly poured into some trucks, and while other drivers were out delivering concrete. After the strike began, Glacier instructed its drivers to finish deliveries in progress, but the Union directed the drivers to ignore the order and at least nine drivers abandoned their trucks. As a result, Glacier had to quickly resolve the emergency situation and properly dispose of the concrete before it hardened in the trucks. Glacier managed to resolve the situation in a five-hour-long "mad scramble" and prevent damage to its trucks, but incurred...