## Facts

- The National Labor Relations Board certified the North American Soccer League Players Association (NASLPA) on September 1, 1978, as the exclusive bargaining representative for professional soccer players employed by the League’s member clubs.
- After certification, the North American Soccer League (NASL) and its member clubs refused to recognize and bargain in good faith with NASLPA and continued to negotiate individual player contracts directly with players.
- While unfair labor practice charges and complaints were pending before the NLRB, the NLRB Regional Director filed a petition in the Southern District of New York seeking temporary injunctive relief under NLRA § 10(j), 29 U.S.C. § 160(j).
- The district court found NASL unilaterally implemented material changes to players’ terms and conditions of employment without bargaining, including extending the regular season, creating a winter indoor season, reducing roster sizes, altering player movement rules, and imposing footwear requirements.
- The district court found that continued individual contracting and embedding unilateral changes in contracts undermined the union’s representational role and weakened support for collective bargaining.

## Issues

1. Whether there was reasonable cause to believe NASL committed unfair labor practices under NLRA §§ 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain and by making unilateral changes to mandatory subjects of bargaining.
2. Whether interim relief under NLRA § 10(j) was “just and proper” to prevent employer conduct from frustrating the NLRB’s ability to provide meaningful final relief.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion by ordering restorative interim remedies, including revocation of unilateral changes and allowing the union to rescind specified provisions of existing player contracts.

## Decision

- The district court granted a § 10(j) injunction after finding reasonable cause to believe NASL violated §§ 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) and concluding interim relief was just and proper.
- The injunction required rescission or revocation of identified unilateral changes in working conditions.
- The injunction authorized NASLPA, at its option, to rescind provisions of existing player contracts imposed during the alleged unlawful period, except for “exclusive rights” provisions.
- The Second Circuit affirmed in a per curiam decision, adopting the district court’s findings and conclusions and holding the remedies were within the district court’s discretion under § 10(j).

## Legal Principles

- Under NLRA § 10(j), a district court may grant interim relief when the NLRB’s Regional Director shows (1) reasonable cause to believe an unfair labor practice occurred and (2) the requested relief is just and proper to preserve the Board’s remedial authority.
- In § 10(j) proceedings, courts do not finally decide the merits of the unfair labor practice charges; they assess whether the legal theory is substantial and whether the evidence supports reasonable cause.
- After a union is certified, an employer’s duty to bargain prohibits unilateral changes to mandatory subjects of bargaining and prohibits bypassing the union by dealing directly with represented employees.
- Restorative § 10(j) relief may be warranted where employer conduct risks making later NLRB remedies ineffective, including orders that undo unilateral changes and relieve employees from contract restraints created by alleged unlawful conduct.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit upheld interim, restorative § 10(j) relief against a professional sports league based on reasonable cause to believe the league refused to bargain and imposed unilateral changes that eroded the union’s status and threatened to defeat meaningful final NLRB remedies.


Morio v. N. Am. Soccer League, 632 F.2d 217 (2d Cir. 1980)