John Paul Stevens

“ Petitioner's allegation that the union's officers used their union-granted authority over the hiring hall to punish him for his union activities should also be sufficient to support the claim that punishment was imposed "under color of" the union's right to control its membership and that the "opprobrium of the union as an entity " was "visited upon petitioner." ”

“ Union discipline is thus punishment imposed by the union or its officers "to control the member's conduct in order to protect the interests of the union or its membership." Miller v. Holden, 535 F.2d 912, 915 (CA5 1976) . It easily includes the use of a hiring hall system by one who is charged with administering it to punish a member for his political opposition. ”

“ And they refer not only to fines, suspension, and expulsion, the usual sanctions imposed by a union, but also to unspecified means by which the union "otherwise discipline [s] " its members.
As a matter of plain language, "discipline" constitutes "punishment by one in authority . ”

“ Moreover, as a matter of the statute's purpose and policy, it would make little sense to exclude the abuse of a hiring hall to deprive a member of job referrals from the type of discipline against which the union member is protected. Congress intended the LMRDA to prevent unions from exercising control over their membership through measures that did not provide adequate procedural protection. " [I] nterference with employment rights constitute [s] a powerful tool by which union leaders [can] control union affairs, often in violation of workers' membership rights." ”

“ Here, participation in the Union's job referral program is a benefit enjoyed by all members of the Union within the bargaining unit, and the issue is whether withdrawal of the benefit can be deemed 'discipline' even though that benefit may also be extended to non-members of the Union. Finnegan § emphasis on the distinction between union members and union leaders does not apply to this situation. ”

“ Moreover, such an action bears enough similarity to the specific disciplinary actions referred to in Section 609 to fall within the residual category of sanctions-encompassed by the phrase 'otherwise disciplined'-that are subject to that provision. ”

“ This construction of the labor organization's "Bill of Rights" is perverse and cannot have been intended by Congress.
Finally, this case is not controlled, as the Court of Appeals concluded, by our decision in Finnegan v. Leu, 456 U.S. 431, 102 S.Ct. 1867, 72 L.Ed.2d 239 (1982) . In that case, we held that removal from appointive union employment did not constitute discipline within the meaning of § 609. Id., at 437, 102 S.Ct., at 1871; see also Sheet Metal Workers v. ”