Suppose your employees walk off the job in protest of stalled negotiations over a new collective bargaining agreement. Further suppose that their union (allegedly) coordinates the strike with the precise time your concrete is being mixed and delivered for the day, causing the destruction of your product.
Can you hold the union liable under state law for their alleged tortious conduct?
According to the State of Washington’s Supreme Court, the answer is “no.”
The employer is now asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review that decision, arguing that the NLRA provides an inadequate remedy (or, more accurately, no remedy at all) for the union’s misconduct since it does not provide recovery for property damage. Without a remedy, there is nothing to deter unions from engaging in this unlawful conduct. Indeed, the employer argues, with no legal deterrent to hold unions accountable for strike-related misconduct, this decision actually encourages vandalism and other torts that would be unlawful in any other circumstance.
The union is opposing the petition, arguing that the employer could have saved its concrete if it had just arranged for replacement workers or management employees to handle the deliveries during the strike.
