RADIO & TELEVISION BROADCAST TECHNICIANS LOCAL UNION 1264, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL-CIO, ET AL.
v.
BROADCAST SERVICE OF MOBILE, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court reversed an Alabama court's assumption of jurisdiction over a labor dispute involving peaceful picketing and boycott activities by a union against a radio station, holding that when the National Labor Relations Board would assert jurisdiction over an employer—here, by considering nominally separate radio stations as a single integrated enterprise based on common ownership, management, and control—federal labor law preempts state court jurisdiction and state courts must yield to federal authority.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Per Curiam.
The union, Radio and Television Broadcast Technicians, challenged the Alabama Circuit Court's jurisdiction over a suit by Broadcast Service of Mobile, the corporate name of Radio Station WSIM, to restrain peaceful picketing by the union and its solicitation of advertisers aimed at persuading them to cease doing business with the station. It contended that although the annual gross receipts of WSIM are below the National Labor Relations Board’s jurisdictional minimum of $100,000 per year for radio stations, WSIM is an integral part of a group of radio stations owned and operated by Charles W. Holt and the Holt Broadcasting Service and that the annual receipts of the common enterprise are in excess of $100,000, which is determinative under the Board’s standards. Stating that every court has judicial power to determine its jurisdiction and that the union failed to allege "that the appellant’s [WSIM’s] gross business exceeded $100,000 per annum,” the Alabama Supreme Court held that the state courts had jurisdiction over WSIM’s complaint. We granted certiorari. 379 U. S.
812. The judgment below must be reversed.
Although a state court may assume jurisdiction over labor disputes over which the National Labor Relations Board has, but declines to assert, jurisdiction, 29 U.
S. C. §§ 164 (c)(1) and (2) (1958 ed., Supp. V), there must be a proper determination of whether the case is actually one of those which the Board will decline to hear. Hattiesburg Building Trades Council v. Broome, 377 U. S.
126. The Board will assert jurisdiction over an employer operating a radio station if his gross receipts equal or exceed $100,000 per year, Raritan Valley Broadcasting Co., 122 N.
L. R. B. 90, and in determining the relevant employer, the Board considers several nominally separate business entities to be a single employer where they comprise an integrated enterprise, N.
L. R. B. twenty-first Ann. Rep. 14-15 (1956). The controlling criteria, set out and elaborated in Board decisions, are interrelation of operations, common management, centralized control of labor relations and common ownership. Sakrete of Northern California, Inc., 137 N.
L. R. B. 1220, aff’d 332 F. 2d 902 (C. A. 9th Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U. S. 961; Family Laundry, Inc., 121 N.
L. R. B. 1619; Canton, Carp’s, Inc., 125 N.
L. R. B. 483; V.
I. P. Radio, Inc., 128 N.
L. R. B. 113; Perfect T. V., Inc., 134 N.
L. R. B. 575; Overton Markets, Inc., 142 N.
L. R. B.
615.
The record made below is more than adequate to show that all of these factors are present in regard to the Holt enterprise* and that this is not a case which the Board has announced it would decline to hear. Since the conduct set out in the complaint is regulated by the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, 29 U.
S. C. § 141 et seq. (1958 ed.), “due regard for the federal enactment requires that state jurisdiction must yield.” San Diego Building Trades v. Garmon, 359 U. S. 236, 244; Construction & General Laborers’ Union v. Curry, 371 U. S. 542.
Reversed.
*
The United States, as amicus curiae, confirms the view that the Board’s standards for determining a single employer enterprise were fully satisfied by the structure and operation of the Holt stations.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (72 total)
-
S. Prairie Constr. Co. v. Local NO. 627, Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs, AFL-CIO, 425 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1976)…itors; and the two firms’ competitive bidding patterns on Oklahoma highway jobs after South Prairie was activated in 1972 to do business there.2 Stating that it was applying the criteria recognized by this Court in Radio Union v. Broadcast Service, 380 U. S. 255 (1965),3 the Court of Appeals disagreed with the Board and decided that on the facts presented Kiewit and South Prairie were a single “employer.” It reasoned that in addition to the “presence of a very substantial qualitative degree of centralized c…1 / 2
-
Soule Glass & Glazing Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 652 F.2d 1055 (1st Cir. 1981)…enterprise. . .. The controlling criteria, ... are [1] interrelation of operations, [2] common management, [3] centralized control of labor relations and [4] common ownership.” Radio & Television Broadcast Union v. Broadcast Service of Mobile, Inc., 380 U.S. 255, 256, 85 S.Ct. 876, 877, 13 L.Ed.2d 789 (1965) (per curiam). This court has noted that the Board’s “single employer” conclusion “is ‘essentially a factual one’ and not to be disturbed provided substantial evidence in the record supports the Board’…1 / 2
-
Carpenters Local Union NO. 1846 OF the United Bhd. OF Carpenters & Joiners OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Pratt-Farnsworth, Inc., 690 F.2d 489 (5th Cir. 1982)…ombine the amount of business of two or more employers so that the whole will exceed the Board’s self-imposed jurisdictional minimum. E.g., Radio & Television Broadcast Technicians Local Union 1264 v. Broadcast Service of Mobile, Inc. (Radio Union), 380 U.S. 255, 256, 85 S.Ct. 876, 877, 13 L.Ed.2d 789 (1965) (per curiam), quoted with approval in South Prairie Construction Co. v. Local No. 627, International Union of Operating Engineers (Peter Kiewit), 425 U.S. 800, 802 n.3, 96 S.Ct. 1842, 1843 n.3, 48 L.Ed.…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 72 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- San Diego Bldg. Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236 (U.S. 1959)
- Local NO. 438 Constr. & Gen. Laborers' Union, AFL-CIO v. Curry, 371 U.S. 542 (U.S. 1963)
- Sakrete OF N. Cal., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1964)
- Dandy Prods., Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 379 U.S. 961 (U.S. 1965)
- Lord v. Kelley, 379 U.S. 961 (U.S. 1965)
- Hattiesburg Bldg. & Trades Council v. Broome, 377 U.S. 126 (U.S. 1964)
- Radio & Television Broad. Technicians Local Union 1264, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, AFL-CIO v. Broad. Serv. of Mobile, Inc., 379 U.S. 812 (U.S. 1964)