Local 28 of Sheet Metal Workers International Association v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Local 28 of Sheet Metal Workers International Association v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is a significant court case that addressed issues of racial discrimination within labor unions. In this case, a federal district court determined that Local 28 had engaged in discriminatory practices against nonwhite workers, violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court mandated the union to implement measures to increase nonwhite membership to 29 percent, reflecting the demographic composition of the relevant labor pool.
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision led by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., affirmed that Title VII permitted courts to impose "make-whole" relief, which could include quotas and preferences for individuals who had not personally experienced discrimination. This ruling emphasized the court's stance on promoting equality within the workforce, despite potential future shifts in the judicial perspective on affirmative action under subsequent courts. The Local 28 case remains a pivotal reference point in discussions about labor rights, affirmative action, and the ongoing struggle against workplace discrimination.
Local 28 of Sheet Metal Workers International Association v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Date: July 2, 1986
Citation: 478 U.S. 421
Issue: Affirmative action
Significance: The Supreme Court approved a federal district court’s order requiring a hiring goal and a timetable for the employment of minority workers as a remedy for a union’s past discrimination.
A federal district court found that a labor union had discriminated against nonwhite workers in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court ordered the union to cease its discriminatory practices and to achieve a membership of 29 percent nonwhite workers, which would be equal to the percentage in the relevant labor pool. Speaking for a 6-3 majority, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., concluded that Title VII did not prohibit courts from providing “make-whole” relief that included quotas and preferences affecting individuals who had not been the actual victims of discrimination. Although the Supreme Court under William H. Rehnquist subsequently decided to scrutinize affirmative action programs from a more critical perspective, the Local 28 decision was never overturned.
