RLA BARGAINING DILEMMA: DO COURTS REALLY FOLLOW WILLIAMS?

The right of carriers under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) to unilaterally change the rates of pay, rules or working conditions before reaching an initial collective-bargaining agreement with a newly-certified union seemed well settled after the Supreme Court's decision in 1942 in Williams v. Jacksonville Terminal Co. Since this ruling, Supreme Court and circuit court decisions have called into question the remaining force of this holding, but courts still appear to be reluctant to change this long-standing precedent. While Williams has certainly been eroded as a result of this subsequent precedent discussed herein, many courts remain reluctant to change its holding in any fashion. However, several courts have created exceptions to Williams where there has been some initial bargaining or based on carrier interference. These exceptions to the Williams rule appear logical in light of the decision in Katz under the National Labor Relations Act, finding unilateral changes to be per se violations of the duty to bargain.