## Facts

- Allen-Bradley Company operated a Wisconsin manufacturing plant and was subject to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
- Allen-Bradley Local No. 1111 represented employees for collective bargaining under a labor contract.
- The union cancelled the contract, authorized a strike by secret ballot, and called the strike on May 11, 1939; the strike lasted roughly three months while the company continued operating.
- During the strike, conflict arose between strikers and employees who continued working.
- The employer filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Employment Relations Board (WERB) alleging union “unfair labor practices” under the Wisconsin Employment Peace Act.
- WERB found coercive conduct and issued a cease-and-desist order directing the union, officers, agents, and members to stop mass picketing at the plant, threats of injury or property damage, obstructing plant access, obstructing surrounding streets and roads, and picketing employees’ homes.
- Wisconsin courts enforced the order; the union sought review arguing federal preemption because the employer was within NLRA jurisdiction.

## Issues

1. Whether the NLRA preempts a state labor board’s order restraining mass picketing, intimidation, threats, obstruction of access and public ways, and home picketing at a workplace within NLRA coverage.
2. Whether, absent a clear congressional statement, a state may apply its police power to prevent violence and coercion connected to a labor dispute without intruding on the National Labor Relations Board’s authority.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the state judgment enforcing WERB’s cease-and-desist order.
- The Court held the order was not repugnant to the NLRA and was not unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause.
- Relying on the state supreme court’s narrowing construction, the Court treated the state statute as affecting the parties only to the extent of the specific restraints imposed by the order.
- The Court concluded Congress had not clearly displaced state authority to curb violence, intimidation, and physical obstruction associated with labor disputes.

## Legal Principles

- Federal displacement of a state’s police power requires a clearly manifested congressional intent.
- The NLRA regulates labor relations and collective bargaining, but it does not confer a federally protected right to use violence, threats, coercion, mass picketing that obstructs access, or obstruction of public ways.
- States may restrain coercive and obstructive conduct connected to strikes as an exercise of traditional police powers, even when the employer and union are otherwise within NLRA coverage.
- A state supreme court’s authoritative construction of its statute controls the federal court’s analysis of what the state law, as applied, regulates.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld Wisconsin’s limited cease-and-desist order against violent, coercive, and obstructive strike-related conduct, holding that the NLRA did not preempt state police-power measures aimed at maintaining public order and protecting persons and property.


Allen-Bradley Loc. No. 1111 v. Wis. Emp. Rels. Bd., 315 U.S. 740 (1942)