THE ANTITRUST LIABILITY OF LABOR UNIONS FOR ANTICOMPETITIVE LITIGATION

Opposing permit applications on environmental or regulatory grounds is one strategy labor unions have used to eliminate competing nonunion contractors. Job owners who refuse to use union labor can find their projects blocked entirely or their costs increased significantly if their permits are challenged. The authors argue that union pursuit of litigation or permit interference against projects using nonunion contractors as a means of driving competitors out of business violates the antitrust laws. The primary objective of such union strategy is anticompetitive and bears no relation to the stated objectives of the threatened litigation or interference. While the labor exemption and Noerr-Pennington immunity limit the application of the antitrust laws to cases of this type, the Comment concludes that the unions can be held accountable for attempts to coerce market participants by monopolization or group boycotts.