October Term 2013 · Docket 12-99
Does a union payment for employee data violate labor law?
Employers and unions dispute whether paying for employee lists and access breaches federal labor statutes.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. McCracken argued these agreements avoid conflict and create good environments.
Mr. Messenger argued enforcing Section 302 cannot conflict with the NLRA.
Mr. Dreeben argued Section 302 cannot be read in isolation.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-15
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests if a union paying an employer for organizing benefits violates Section 302.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 13, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
The union wants the court to allow these payments.
The employer wants the court to ban these payments.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
What each side says
The union argues these agreements prevent conflict and aid bargaining.
The employer argues these payments violate federal labor laws.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if the payment constitutes property.
Justice Scalia asked if the union promised legislative support.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-15
Why it matters
This dispute defines the limits of union-employer financial arrangements during organizing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 41-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 41-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-15
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 27-49 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 27-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.