Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 179.11 (2026)

Employee Unfair Labor Practices

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) It is an unfair labor practice:

(1) for any employee or labor organization to institute a strike if such strike is a violation of any valid collective agreement between any employer and its employees or labor organization and the employer is, at the time, in good faith complying with the provisions of the agreement, or to violate the terms and conditions of such bargaining agreement;

(2) for any employee or labor organization to institute a strike if the calling of such strike is in violation of sections 179.06 or 179.07;

(3) for any person to seize or occupy property unlawfully during the existence of a labor dispute;

(4) for any person to picket or cause to be picketed a place of employment of which place the person is not an employee while a strike is in progress affecting the place of employment, unless the majority of persons engaged in picketing the place of employment at these times are employees of the place of employment;

(5) for more than one person to picket or cause to be picketed a single entrance to any place of employment where no strike is in progress at the time;

(6) for any person to interfere in any manner with the operation of a vehicle or the operator thereof when neither the owner nor operator of the vehicle is at the time a party to a strike;

(7) for any employee, labor organization, or officer, agent, or member thereof, to compel or attempt to compel any person to join or to refrain from joining any labor organization or any strike against the person's will by any threatened or actual unlawful interference with the person, or immediate family member, or physical property, or to assault or unlawfully threaten any such person while in pursuit of lawful employment;

(8) unless the strike has been approved by a majority vote of the voting employees in a collective bargaining unit of the employees of an employer or association of employers against whom such strike is primarily directed, for any person or labor organization to cooperate in engaging in, promoting, or inducing a strike. Such vote shall be taken by secret ballot at an election called by the collective bargaining agent for the unit, and reasonable notice shall be given to all employees in the collective bargaining unit of the time and place of election; or

(9) for any person or labor organization to hinder or prevent by intimidation, force, coercion or sabotage, or by threats thereof, the production, transportation, processing or marketing by a producer, processor or marketing organization, of agricultural products, or to combine or conspire to cause or threaten to cause injury to any processor, producer or marketing organization, whether by withholding labor or other beneficial intercourse, refusing to handle, use or work on particular agricultural products, or by other unlawful means, in order to bring such processor or marketing organization against its will into a concerted plan to coerce or inflict damage upon any producer; provided that nothing in this subsection shall prevent a strike which is called by the employees of such producer, processor or marketing organization for the bona fide purpose of improving their own working conditions or promoting or protecting their own rights of organization, selection of bargaining representative or collective bargaining.

(b) It is an unlawful act to violate paragraph (a), clause (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), or (9).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1943–2007 · leading case: Dayton Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum & Resilient Floor Decorators' Union, 39 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1949).
Dayton Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum & Resilient Floor Decorators' Union, 39 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1949). · cites it 5× “11(2) and an unlawful act by § 179.11(10). It is also an unfair labor practice to call a strike unless it has been approved by a majority vote of the voting employes in a collective bargaining unit, or for any person or labor organization to cooperate in engaging in or inducing…”
Anderson v. Tuomi, 17 A.L.R. 2d 744 (Minn. 1950). · cites it 36× “" In a memorandum attached to the findings and conclusions, the trial court stated: "The court has the right to issue a temporary injunction in this case only for a violation of Section 179.11; that is, if the defendants have committed some unfair labor practice.”
Midwest Motor Express, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., Local 120, 494 N.W.2d 895 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 3× “” The district court does not have jurisdiction to issue an injunction except after hearing the testimony of witnesses in open court, with opportunity for cross-examination, in support of the allegations made under oath, and testimony in opposition thereto, if offered, and…”
McLean Distrib. Co. v. Brewery & Beverage Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers Union, Local No. 993, 94 N.W.2d 514 (Minn. 1959). · cites it 2× “02 do not apply to violations of § 179.11 and other sections mentioned therein.”
Emery v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees Union Local No. 556, 161 N.W.2d 842 (Minn. 1968). · cites it 6× “We will first give consideration to § 179.11(7), which reads as follows: "It shall be an unfair labor practice: * * * * * * "(7) For any employee, labor organization, or officer, agent, or member thereof, to compel or attempt to compel any person to join or to refrain from…”
Emery Air Freight Corp. v. Local 544, Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, 379 N.W.2d 539 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 8× “14 excludes the applicability of the Minnesota Little Norris — La-Guardia Act to actions brought under Minn.Stat. § 179.11. It stated: This is a proceeding to enjoin employee unfair labor practices under Minn.”
Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. United Farm Workers Nat'l Union, 241 N.W.2d 292 (Minn. 1976). “Thus, in enacting the 1939 Labor Relations Act, the legislature excluded injunctions issued against various unfair labor practices, defined in §§ 179.11 and 179.12, from the limitations imposed by the 1933 Anti-Injunction Act.”
J. F. Quest Foundry Co. v. Int'l Molders & Foundry Workers Union, 13 N.W.2d 32 (Minn. 1944). “1941, § 179.11(1), which, insofar as here pertinent, reads as follows: “It shall be an unfair labor practice: “(1) For any employee or labor organization * * * to violate the terms and conditions of such bargaining agreement; * * *” *440 and that portion of L.”
Glover v. Minneapolis Bldg. Trades Council, 10 N.W.2d 481 (Minn. 1943). “1941, § 179.11 (Mason St. 1941 Supp. § 4254-31), or other unlawful act on the part of the defendants is alleged.”
Starr v. Cooks, Waiters, Waitresses & Helpers Union Local No. 458, 70 N.W.2d 873 (Minn. 1955). “We have no violation of § 179.11 which provides that it shall be an unfair labor practice (5) to have more than one picket at a single entrance 30 or (7) for any employee, labor organization, or officer, agent, or member thereof, to compel or attempt to compel any person against…”
Petition for Decertification of an Exclusive Rep. Certain Employees of the Univ. of Minnesota, Unit 9, Crookston v. Univ. of Minnesota, 730 N.W.2d 300 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 179.11, subd. 1(9) provides as follows: The Outstate Instructional Unit consists of the positions of all instructional employees .”
McQuay, Inc. v. Int'l Union, United Auto., Aircraft & Agric. Implement Workers, 72 N.W.2d 81 (Minn. 1955). · cites it 5× “179, specifically §§ 179.11 and 179.13 thereof; 3 that the plaintiff was without other adequate remedy; and that the National Labor Relations Act, as amended by the Labor Management Relations Act *277 of 1947, was without application since jurisdiction had been acquired by the…”
— Minn. Stat. § 179.11(1) — 2 cases
J. F. Quest Foundry Co. v. Int'l Molders & Foundry Workers Union, 13 N.W.2d 32 (Minn. 1944). “1941, § 179.11(1), which, insofar as here pertinent, reads as follows: “It shall be an unfair labor practice: “(1) For any employee or labor organization * * * to violate the terms and conditions of such bargaining agreement; * * *” *440 and that portion of L.”
Anderson v. Tuomi, 17 A.L.R. 2d 744 (Minn. 1950). “" In a memorandum attached to the findings and conclusions, the trial court stated: "The court has the right to issue a temporary injunction in this case only for a violation of Section 179.11; that is, if the defendants have committed some unfair labor practice.”
— Minn. Stat. § 179.11(10) — 2 cases
Dayton Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum & Resilient Floor Decorators' Union, 39 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1949). “11(2) and an unlawful act by § 179.11(10). It is also an unfair labor practice to call a strike unless it has been approved by a majority vote of the voting employes in a collective bargaining unit, or for any person or labor organization to cooperate in engaging in or inducing…”
McQuay, Inc. v. Int'l Union, United Auto., Aircraft & Agric. Implement Workers, 72 N.W.2d 81 (Minn. 1955). “179, specifically §§ 179.11 and 179.13 thereof; 3 that the plaintiff was without other adequate remedy; and that the National Labor Relations Act, as amended by the Labor Management Relations Act *277 of 1947, was without application since jurisdiction had been acquired by the…”
— Minn. Stat. § 179.11(2) — 2 cases
Dayton Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum & Resilient Floor Decorators' Union, 39 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1949). “11(2) and an unlawful act by § 179.11(10). It is also an unfair labor practice to call a strike unless it has been approved by a majority vote of the voting employes in a collective bargaining unit, or for any person or labor organization to cooperate in engaging in or inducing…”
— Minn. Stat. § 179.11(6) — 1 case
Midwest Motor Express, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., Local 120, 494 N.W.2d 895 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). “” The district court does not have jurisdiction to issue an injunction except after hearing the testimony of witnesses in open court, with opportunity for cross-examination, in support of the allegations made under oath, and testimony in opposition thereto, if offered, and…”
— Minn. Stat. § 179.11(7) — 1 case
Emery v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees Union Local No. 556, 161 N.W.2d 842 (Minn. 1968). “We will first give consideration to § 179.11(7), which reads as follows: "It shall be an unfair labor practice: * * * * * * "(7) For any employee, labor organization, or officer, agent, or member thereof, to compel or attempt to compel any person to join or to refrain from…”
— Minn. Stat. § 179.11(8) — 2 cases
Anderson v. Tuomi, 17 A.L.R. 2d 744 (Minn. 1950). “" In a memorandum attached to the findings and conclusions, the trial court stated: "The court has the right to issue a temporary injunction in this case only for a violation of Section 179.11; that is, if the defendants have committed some unfair labor practice.”
Dayton Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum & Resilient Floor Decorators' Union, 39 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1949). “11(2) and an unlawful act by § 179.11(10). It is also an unfair labor practice to call a strike unless it has been approved by a majority vote of the voting employes in a collective bargaining unit, or for any person or labor organization to cooperate in engaging in or inducing…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.