Silverman on behalf of NLRB v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Com. - 516 F. Supp. 588 (S.D.N.Y. 1981)

Rule:

To obtain a § 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act injunction, a petitioner must satisfy a two-fold test. First, the court must find that there is reasonable cause to believe that an unfair labor practice has been committed. Second, the court must determine whether the requested relief is just and proper. Regarding issues of fact, the petitioner should be given the benefit of the doubt, and with respect to questions of law, the National Labor Relations Board's view should be sustained unless the court is convinced that it is wrong.

Facts:

Major league baseball's players association, filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board, herein petitioner, alleging the failure of the major league baseball player relations committee, herein respondents, and certain baseball clubs to bargain in good faith for refusing to comply with the association's request for financial disclosure in violation of §§ 8(a)(1) and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act. Petitioner then filed a complaint charging a violation. Petitioner also sought temporary injunctive relief under § 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.S. § 160(j), to require respondents to rescind their action by which they implemented their bargaining proposal regarding free agent compensation. If granted, the relief would preclude major league baseball's players association from commencing a strike.

Issue:

Should the petitioner’s temporary injunctive relief under the National Labor Relations Act be granted?

Answer:

No. The court dismissed the petition.

Conclusion:

The court found that there was no reasonable cause to believe that an unfair labor practice has been committed by respondents. The court then denied the petition.  The court noted that although good-faith bargaining required that claims made by either bargainer be made in good faith, an employer was required to disclose its financial condition only when the employer claimed an inability to pay during the course of bargaining. Public statements made by representatives of the committee and club owners regarding free agency's financial impact on the ability of the clubs to pay ballplayer salaries were not made during bargaining sessions. Therefore, the statements were insufficient to support a finding that they injected the inability to pay into the negotiations.