Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

International Paper Company v. National Labor Relations Board, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Intervenors Case Brief

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit1997Docket #462885
115 F.3d 1045 325 U.S. App. D.C. 142 155 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2641 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 15500

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: An employer permanently subcontracted maintenance work during a lawful lockout. The court reversed the NLRB, finding the action was not “inherently destructive” of employee rights and was justified by legitimate business reasons, thus not constituting an unfair labor practice.

Legal Significance: Establishes that an employer may, after bargaining to impasse, permanently subcontract work during a lawful lockout without committing an unfair labor practice, provided the action is motivated by legitimate business needs and not anti-union animus.

International Paper Company v. National Labor Relations Board, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Intervenors Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

After contract negotiations with the Unions reached an impasse, International Paper Company (IP) lawfully locked out its production and maintenance employees at its Mobile, Alabama mill. IP continued operations using supervisors and temporary maintenance workers from a contractor, BE&K. Discovering significant potential cost savings, IP proposed to permanently subcontract all maintenance work to BE&K. After bargaining with the Unions on this specific proposal, IP implemented the permanent subcontract while the lockout was ongoing. The agreement with BE&K was terminable on 30 days’ notice, and a side letter, not disclosed to the Unions, specified that the end of the lockout would constitute cause for termination without penalty. Nine months later, facing an unfair labor practice complaint, IP canceled the permanent subcontract and reverted to a temporary one. The lockout eventually ended with a new collective bargaining agreement. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that implementing the permanent subcontract during the lockout was an unfair labor practice under sections 8(a)(1), (3), and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), deeming it “inherently destructive” of employee rights.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does an employer violate section 8(a)(3) of the NLRA by implementing a permanent subcontract for bargaining unit work during a lawful lockout, after having bargained to impasse on the issue?

No. The court held that implementing a permanent subcontract during a lawful Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate vel

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does an employer violate section 8(a)(3) of the NLRA by implementing a permanent subcontract for bargaining unit work during a lawful lockout, after having bargained to impasse on the issue?

Conclusion

This case solidifies an employer's right to use permanent subcontracting as an Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex

Legal Rule

Employer conduct that is "inherently destructive" of important employee rights violates § Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Ex

Legal Analysis

The court reversed the NLRB, reasoning that the focus of the "inherently Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • An employer may permanently subcontract work during a lawful lockout after
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur s

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More