## Facts

- Golden State Bottling Company discharged Kenneth L. Baker, a driver-salesman.
- The NLRB found the discharge an unfair labor practice and ordered Golden State, including its “successors and assigns,” to reinstate Baker with backpay.
- After the Board’s order issued, Golden State sold its bottling and distribution business to All American Beverages.
- All American continued the business without material change in operations, workforce, or supervision.
- In backpay specification proceedings, the NLRB found All American purchased the business with knowledge of the pending unfair labor practice litigation and outstanding Board order.
- The NLRB ordered All American to reinstate Baker and ordered Golden State and All American to pay backpay jointly and severally.
- The Ninth Circuit enforced the Board’s order; Golden State and All American sought Supreme Court review.

## Issues

1. Whether the NLRB may order a bona fide purchaser that continues the business and had notice of an outstanding unfair-labor-practice order to reinstate the discharged employee and provide backpay.
2. Whether such relief exceeds the NLRB’s remedial authority under NLRA § 10(c) when the successor did not commit the unfair labor practice.
3. Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d) bars enforcement of an NLRB order against a successor that was not a party to the original unfair labor practice case.
4. Whether the Board permissibly imposed joint and several backpay liability and properly computed backpay to make the employee whole.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed enforcement of the NLRB order.
- The Court held the NLRB may require a successor that continues the enterprise and purchased with notice of an unremedied unfair labor practice to reinstate the employee and provide backpay.
- The Court held this remedy falls within the NLRB’s broad discretion under NLRA § 10(c) to order affirmative relief that effectuates the Act’s policies.
- The Court held Rule 65(d) does not bar enforcement because a successor with notice may be treated as in privity with the predecessor for purposes of binding effect.
- The Court upheld the findings that All American had knowledge at purchase under the substantial-evidence standard.
- The Court approved joint and several liability and the Board’s backpay computation as within remedial discretion.

## Legal Principles

- NLRA § 10(c) grants the NLRB broad remedial authority to order affirmative action, including reinstatement and backpay, to effectuate the Act’s policies.
- A successor employer that acquires and continues a business with substantial continuity, and with notice of an outstanding Board order concerning an unremedied unfair labor practice, may be ordered to reinstate the affected employee and share backpay liability.
- Backpay is a make-whole remedy; successor liability may be imposed to prevent evasion of labor obligations through asset transfers and to ensure effective enforcement.
- Rule 65(d) does not prevent enforcement of Board orders against successors with notice where the successor stands in sufficient privity with the predecessor in relation to the employing enterprise.
- Appellate review of Board factfinding applies the substantial-evidence-on-the-record-as-a-whole standard.

## Conclusion

The Court sustained the NLRB’s power to bind a successor that knowingly acquires and continues the employing enterprise to reinstate an unlawfully discharged employee and provide backpay, and it rejected Rule 65(d) as a barrier to enforcing such relief against the successor.


Golden State Bottling Co. v. NLRB, 414 U.S. 168 (1973)