A strike to protest conditions abnormally dangerous to health has been held not to violate a no-strike provision.1

A contractual no-strike, no-picketing clause has been held not to prevent an informational picket line at a shareholders’ meeting to protest the slow pace of negotiations. The contract declared the intention of the company and union to prevent any suspension of work due to labor disputes. The union agreed that it would not call, participate in or sanction any strike, boycott, picketing, work stoppage or slow-down whatsoever. The contract further specified that employees violating this provision are subject to immediate discharge at the discretion of the employer with no recourse to the grievance procedure. The NLRB ruled that the purpose was to prevent any work suspension due to labor disputes during the term of agreement. The ban on picketing was limited to that causing a suspension of work. The picketing at the shareholders’ meeting could not reasonably have been expected to lead to a work suspension. The NLRB has previously declined to find a waiver of statutory rights enforceable, such as the right to picket, unless the waiver is “clear and unmistakable.”2

Section 8(d)3 provides steps that must be taken to terminate an existing contract. If these requirements are not met, a strike to terminate or change a contract is unlawful and participating strikers lose their status as employees. If the strike was caused by the unfair labor practice of the employer, the strikers are classified as unfair labor practice strikers and their status is not affected by failure to follow the required procedure.

1. Gateway Coal Co v Mine Workers, 414 U.S. 368, 387 (1974)