THE
RAILWAY LABOR ACT – GOVERNING THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY©*
I. LABOR DISPUTES
The
Railway Labor Act, as amended, 45 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. ("RLA" or
"Act"), was enacted in 1926 to encourage collective bargaining by
railroads and their employees in order to prevent wasteful strikes and
interruptions of interstate commerce.
It is the basic body of law defining employee/employer labor rights and
duties. The Act was extended to
encompass disputes between air carriers and their employees in 1936. 45 U.S.C. § 181.
The
Act is designed to maintain uninterrupted transportation operations and imposes
a duty upon the employer and the union to bargain in the event of a labor
dispute. The statute mandates that
carriers and unions must "exert every reasonable effort to make and
maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, rules and working conditions, and
to settle all disputes."
45 U.S.C. § 152.
The RLA declares
it to be unlawful for any carrier to interfere in any way with the organization
of its employees or to use the funds of the carrier to form a competing labor
organization. It also provides
that disputes between an employee or group of employees and a carrier or
carriers growing out of grievances or the interpretation or application of
collective bargaining by either party may be referred to a system board of
adjustment which each carrier has a duty to establish.
There are two
types of labor disputes under the RLA:
major disputes or minor disputes.
The United States'
Supreme Court has set forth the standard for differentiating between major and
minor disputes.
[A] major dispute relates to disputes
over the formation of collective agreements or efforts to secure them. They arise when there is no such
agreement or where it is sought to change of terms of one . . . [A] minor dispute . . . contemplates
the existence of a collective agreement already concluded or, at any rate, a
situation in which no effort is made to bring about a formal change in terms or
to create a new one. The dispute
relates either to the meaning or proper application of a particular provision
with reference to a specific situation or to an omitted case.
If there is a
major dispute, conduct by either party must be enjoined until the parties
complete the mediation process prescribed by the statute. If the actions constitute a minor
dispute, a federal district court has no authority to enter an injunction: exclusive jurisdiction over minor
disputes is vested in the system board of adjustment, which procedure is
mandatory and exclusive.
As one court has
said, the dispute is major if the change being imposed is not contemplated or
arguably covered by the collective bargaining agreement. It is a minor dispute where the
position of one or both of the parties is expressly and arguably predicated on
the terms of the agreement.
A
party initiates a major dispute by filing a Section 6 notice proposing changes
in the parties' collective bargaining agreement. Once a Section 6 notice is filed and/or
after the collective bargaining agreement ends, neither party may alter the
conditions of employment in effect but must maintain the "status quo"
during the course of settlement. The parties have an obligation under the Act
to make every reasonable effort to negotiate a settlement and to refrain from altering
the status quo while the major dispute procedures of the Act are being
exhausted.
If the parties are
unable to reach an agreement through negotiations, either party may ask for the
services of the National Mediation Board, ("NMB"). A mediator is then assigned to aid the
parties in reaching an agreement.
The NMB has complete discretion in conducting mediation and in deciding
when to release the parties from mediation. Until released by the NMB, the status quo must be
maintained. The NMB may attempt to
get the parties to submit their controversy to binding arbitration. If the NMB's written proffer of
arbitration is rejected by either party, a 30-day cooling-off period begins to
run from that date. If the NMB
concludes that a dispute threatens to interrupt interstate commerce and deprive
a section of the country of essential transportation service, the NMB must
notify the President of the United States who then, in his discretion, may
create an emergency board to investigate the dispute. The emergency board has 30 days to
investigate and report, but that period may be extended. During that time period, and for 30
days after the report is issued, the parties must maintain the status quo.
The
purpose of the statutorily imposed cooling off period is to give the parties
enough time to conduct calm negotiations and resolve their differences before
they resort to self-help and cause disruptions of interstate commerce. A critical aspect of the RLA was the
power given to the parties and the National Mediation Board to make the
exhaustion of the RLA's remedies an almost "interminable process,"
thus preventing or at least greatly delaying either party from resorting to
self-help. However, once the RLA's
mediation process has been exhausted, either party may resort to self-help by
unilaterally changing working conditions or striking, as the case may be.
A great deal of
litigation involves issues of whether there has been a change in the working
conditions, which change can be enjoined, or whether the dispute constitutes a
minor dispute and subject to the mandatory arbitration procedures.
All minor disputes
are subject to binding arbitration before an adjustment board. Judicial review of an adjustment
board's decision is limited.
"[I]f an employer asserts a claim that the parties' agreement gives
the employer the discretion to make a particular change in working conditions
without prior negotiation, and if that claim is arguably justified by the terms
of the parties' agreement (i.e., the claim is neither obviously insubstantial
or frivolous, nor made in bad faith), the employer may make the change and the
courts must defer to the arbitral jurisdiction of the Board."
While the federal
courts have no jurisdiction to resolve minor disputes, a system board decision
may be judicially reviewed by a federal court in three limited categories: (1) failure of the board to comply with the requirements of the
RLA; (2) failure of the board to conform, or confine, itself to matters within
the scope of it's jurisdiction; (3)
fraud or corruption.
The
distinction between major and minor disputes becomes more complicated when
considering implied terms of a collective bargaining agreement. Because collective bargaining
agreements are meant to be generalized codes to govern a myriad of cases, the
parties' prior practice usage and custom is relevant in determining the rights
of the parties under the agreement.
Thus, in many situations, district courts must decide the actual
objective working conditions out of which the dispute arose to determine the
details of the statutory status quo.
Courts must then review the agreements' terms and the intent of the
parties when they agreed to those terms.
II. THE NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD
The
entire purpose of the National Mediation Board, which was not established until
1934, is to provide an integrated dispute resolution process to meet the
statutory objective of the RLA of minimizing work stoppages in both the airline
and railroad industries. Its
procedures are designed to promote three goals outlined in the statute: (1) a prompt and orderly resolution of disputes arising out of
the negotiations of new or revised collective bargaining agreements; (2) the effectuation of employee rights of
self-organization where a representation dispute exists; and (3) the prompt and orderly resolution of
disputes over the interpretation or application of existing agreements.
As
previously noted, with respect to mediation, the parties to collective
bargaining disputes are urged to resolve such disputes through direct
negotiations. However, either
party may request the NMB's intervention or it may involve itself on its own
initiative. The NMB's success rate
has been remarkable and statistics indicate that since approximately 1980, only
slightly more than 1% of cases referred to it have involved the disruption of
service. The Presidential
Emergency Board, discussed in part I, supra,
temporarily delays a work stoppage or lockout for up to sixty days and provides
recommendations for resolving the dispute. The NMB's power to hold the disputed mediation for
whatever duration is the key to the structure Congress established for bringing
about settlements without industrial strikes. Federal courts have no power to terminate mediation and force
the parties to go to arbitration.
As one court has said, "the judicial review of NMB decisions is one
of the narrowest known to the law."
.
Finally, the NMB
is responsible for effectuating employee rights to self-organization where a
representation dispute exists.
Accordingly, the NMB's determination of collective bargaining
representation enhances the stability of collective bargaining in the airline
industry. Its role is to conduct
the initial investigation of representation applications and determine and
certify collective bargaining representatives of employees. It is also there to insure that the
process of electing a representative occurs without interference, coercion, or
influence.
