## Facts

- Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association and its Joint Apprenticeship Committee were found to have systematically excluded nonwhite workers from union membership and apprenticeship opportunities.
- After a bench trial, a federal district court found liability under Title VII and New York law and ordered the union to end discrimination and implement an affirmative action program.
- At the time of the initial remedial order, nonwhite membership was about 3.19% of the union.
- The district court set a nonwhite membership goal tied to the relevant New York City labor pool (approximately 29%) and appointed an administrator to supervise compliance.
- The union repeatedly failed to comply, and the district court held it in civil contempt, imposed contempt fines, and directed the fines into an Employment, Training, Education, and Recruitment Fund to increase nonwhite membership and apprenticeship participation.
- On appeal, the Second Circuit largely affirmed the contempt findings and remedial framework, while modifying certain details (including removal of a rigid one-for-one apprentice selection requirement).
- The Supreme Court reviewed whether Title VII and constitutional limits allowed the membership goal, the Fund and contempt sanctions, and the administrator.

## Issues

1. Whether Title VII permits a federal court, after finding persistent discrimination, to impose race-conscious union membership goals tied to labor-force percentages, notwithstanding Title VII §§ 706(g) and 703(j).
2. Whether contempt fines and a court-directed fund dedicated to training and recruitment are permissible civil contempt remedies to enforce a Title VII decree.
3. Whether appointing a court administrator to supervise compliance is a proper exercise of equitable authority.
4. Whether the race-conscious remedies violate equal protection principles applicable to federal action.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment upholding the contempt findings and the principal remedial measures, in a fragmented set of opinions.
- The Court sustained the use of a nonwhite membership goal (about 29.23%) as permissible race-conscious relief under Title VII given persistent, egregious discrimination and ongoing noncompliance.
- The Court held the contempt fines and the Employment, Training, Education, and Recruitment Fund were proper civil contempt remedies because they were coercive and remedial rather than punitive.
- The Court upheld the appointment of an administrator to supervise compliance in light of chronic resistance to prior orders.
- Separate opinions disagreed on the statutory scope of permissible race-conscious relief; a partial concurrence/dissent would have invalidated the goal and Fund order on statutory grounds and avoided the constitutional questions.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII § 706(g) gives courts broad equitable authority to order “affirmative action as may be appropriate” to eliminate unlawful discrimination and its effects, including class-wide structural relief after a finding of discrimination.
- The limitation in the final sentence of § 706(g) restricts individualized relief for persons not actually discriminated against, but does not categorically bar structural remedies that may incidentally benefit some nonvictims while dismantling a discriminatory system.
- Title VII § 703(j) bars reading Title VII as requiring preferential treatment solely to correct statistical imbalance, but does not forbid race-conscious remedies imposed by a court after a finding of unlawful discrimination when needed to cure that discrimination.
- Race-conscious membership goals may be upheld when justified by persistent or egregious discrimination, when race-neutral measures have proved ineffective, and when the remedy is temporary and tied to the relevant labor pool.
- Civil contempt sanctions are permissible when designed to coerce compliance with a court order and to remedy the consequences of noncompliance; directing fines to a remedial fund can be an appropriate enforcement tool.
- A court may appoint an administrator to supervise compliance with complex equitable decrees where repeated noncompliance shows that ordinary injunctions are insufficient.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld court-ordered, race-conscious membership goals and related enforcement mechanisms under Title VII, including civil contempt fines placed into a remedial fund and supervision by a court-appointed administrator, where a union’s long-running discrimination and repeated noncompliance required strong, time-limited structural relief.


Local 28 of Sheet Metal Workers' Int'l Ass'n v. EEOC, 478 U.S. 421 (1986)