## Facts

- The Insurance Agents’ International Union represented Prudential insurance agents and negotiated to replace a collective-bargaining agreement expiring in January 1956.
- During bargaining, the union pursued a “work without a contract” campaign while continuing to meet with the employer at the bargaining table.
- The campaign consisted of concerted on-the-job actions intended to disrupt or burden Prudential’s operations to apply economic pressure for the union’s bargaining demands.
- Prudential filed charges alleging the union’s conduct amounted to a refusal to bargain in good faith in violation of NLRA § 8(b)(3).
- A trial examiner found the on-the-job tactics, by themselves, did not violate § 8(b)(3), but the NLRB reversed and treated the conduct as bad-faith bargaining as a matter of law.
- The D.C. Circuit set aside the Board’s order; the Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether NLRA § 8(b)(3) and § 8(d) authorize the NLRB to infer a lack of good faith solely because a union uses concerted on-the-job economic pressure tactics during negotiations.
2. Whether the alleged “harassing” nature of those tactics permits the NLRB to treat them as per se inconsistent with the statutory duty to bargain in good faith.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the D.C. Circuit and denied enforcement of the NLRB’s order.
- The Court held the union’s on-the-job economic pressure, without more, did not support a finding that the union failed to bargain in good faith under § 8(b)(3).
- The Court rejected the Board’s attempt to classify particular union pressure tactics as automatically demonstrating bad-faith bargaining while negotiations continued.

## Legal Principles

- The statutory duty to bargain in good faith under § 8(d) is primarily procedural: parties must meet and confer in good faith, but neither side is required to agree or make concessions.
- The NLRB may not use § 8(b)(3) to control substantive bargaining outcomes by policing or disapproving bargaining pressure tactics as such.
- A union’s use of economic pressure during negotiations does not, by itself, permit an inference of bad faith under § 8(b)(3) when the union continues to bargain with a genuine desire to reach agreement.
- The Board is not empowered under § 8(b)(3) to select among economic weapons and deem certain forms per se inconsistent with good-faith bargaining.
- The fact that a tactic may not be affirmatively protected concerted activity under §§ 7 and 8(a)(1) does not, without additional evidence, convert its use into a refusal to bargain in good faith under § 8(b)(3).

## Conclusion

The Court held that the duty to bargain in good faith does not let the NLRB treat a union’s on-the-job economic pressure during negotiations as automatic evidence of bad-faith bargaining; absent additional proof of refusal to bargain, such tactics cannot support a § 8(b)(3) violation.


NLRB v. Ins. Agents’ Int’l Union, 361 U.S. 477 (1960)