Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters.
In Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters, the Supreme Court addressed whether the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preempts state tort claims. The case involved a work stoppage by unionized truck drivers that led to the destruction of perishable concrete. The Court found that the union did not take reasonable precautions to protect the employer's property, thus the NLRA did not preempt Glacier's tort claims.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters.
The Court held that the NLRA did not preempt Glacier's tort claims against the Union for intentionally destroying property during a labor dispute.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Preemption is relevant to Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters
The central issue in the case is whether the National Labor Relations Act preempts state tort claims.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The NLRA did not preempt Glacier's tort claims alleging that the Union intentionally destroyed the company's property during a labor dispute.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters
The case involves the allocation of authority between state and federal governments regarding labor disputes.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Union moved to dismiss Glacier's tort claims on the ground that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preempted them.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Teamsters that support the summary and concepts above.
The NLRA did not preempt Glacier's tort claims alleging that the Union intentionally destroyed the company's property during a labor dispute.
The Union did not take reasonable precautions to protect Glacier's property from imminent danger resulting from the drivers' sudden cessation of work.
