## Facts

- UFCW Local 23 filed unfair labor practice charges alleging a grocery store employer and the Steelworkers unlawfully entered a collective-bargaining agreement when the Steelworkers lacked majority support.
- The NLRB Regional Director issued complaints based on the charges.
- Before the scheduled hearing, the Regional Director entered an informal settlement with the employer and the Steelworkers; UFCW Local 23 refused to join.
- Under NLRB regulations, a nonconsenting party may seek review of an informal settlement only from the General Counsel, not the Board.
- The General Counsel approved the informal settlement without an evidentiary hearing.
- UFCW Local 23 petitioned the Third Circuit for review; the NLRB argued there was no reviewable “final order of the Board.”
- The Third Circuit asserted jurisdiction and held the General Counsel should not have approved the settlement without a hearing.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

## Issues

1. Whether § 10(f) of the NLRA authorizes judicial review of a post-complaint, pre-hearing informal settlement approved by the NLRB General Counsel when no Board order issued.
2. Whether such an approval is a prosecutorial determination committed to the General Counsel rather than an adjudicatory decision of the Board.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Third Circuit.
- The Court held that a post-complaint, pre-hearing informal settlement approved by the General Counsel is not subject to judicial review under the NLRA.
- Because the informal settlement produced no Board order, the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction under § 10(f).

## Legal Principles

- Judicial review under NLRA § 10(f) is limited to a “final order of the Board.”
- The NLRA draws a structural line between prosecutorial determinations by the General Counsel (independent of the Board) and adjudicatory decisions by the Board that culminate in reviewable Board orders.
- Post-complaint, pre-hearing informal settlement decisions are reasonably treated as prosecutorial choices because, before a hearing, the Board has taken no adjudicatory action.
- NLRB regulations permissibly distinguish formal settlements (which can result in a Board order reviewable under § 10(f)) from informal settlements (reviewable only within the agency by the General Counsel and not producing a Board order).
- The General Counsel’s authority to end a case through an informal settlement before hearing follows from the General Counsel’s unreviewable discretion over filing and withdrawing complaints.

## Conclusion

The Court held that § 10(f) does not permit appellate review of the General Counsel’s approval of an informal settlement reached after a complaint issues but before a hearing, because it is a prosecutorial action that does not yield a final order of the Board.


NLRB v. United Food & Com. Workers Union, Loc. 23, 484 U.S. 112 (1987)