§ 2.3.6 ARGUABLY COVERED BY THE NLRA.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 2.3.6 Arguably Covered by the NLRA. In the latter 1950s, a series of cases raised the question whether the courts were preempted when the NLRA did not expressly address, or refrained from taking, jurisdiction. In San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon,²⁷ the Court held that if the NLRB decides that conduct is arguably protected by Section 7 or arguably prohibited by Section 8 of the NLRA, then the matter is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the NLRA and states are preempted from all jurisdiction. The series of cases culminating in Garmon, stressed that the NLRB, not the state courts, was empowered to pass upon the substantive issues to which the federal statute might be applicable. Thus, it was immaterial that a state statute was not specifically directed at labor relations.²⁸ In the preemption cases, the Supreme Court held that where a state had the power to regulate conduct that arguably was covered by the NLRA, or where the NLRB had refused to assert its jurisdiction, it was still within the ambit of the federal law. For example, the NLRB has established interstate...