Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:08:28.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trends in National Labor Relations Board Decisions for the Health Care Industry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2021

Don A. Zimmerman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The 1974 health care amendments to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the Act) have given rise to several significant developments in the case law. This article focuses on the subjects of appropriate bargaining units, the inclusion — or exclusion — of house staff under the NLRA, and, briefly, the special strike notice requirements under section 8(g) of the Act. These areas have been the subject of substantial controversy and conflict among the federal courts.

In 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act excluded from the term “employer” as defined in the NLRA, “any corporation or association operating a hospital, if no part of the net earnings inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.” In 1974, Congress removed the exclusion for voluntary, nonprofit hospitals and added the new term “health care institution.” In so doing, it found “no acceptable reason why 1,427,012 employees of … non-profit, nonpublic hospitals … should continue to be excluded from the coverage and protections of the Act.

Type
Article
Information
Law, Medicine and Healthcare , Volume 9 , Issue 6 , October 1981 , pp. 12 - 43
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Act of July 26, 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-360, 88 Stat. 395.Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §158(g).Google Scholar
Labor Management Relations (Taft-Hartley) Act §101, 29 U.S.C. §152(2).Google Scholar
Id., as amended July 26, 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-360, §1(a), (b), 88 Stat. 395.Google Scholar
S. Rep. No. 93-76, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess. 13, reprinted in [1974] U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 3946, 3948.Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §158(d).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §158(g).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §158(d).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §159(b).Google Scholar
S. Rep. No. 93-766, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess. 5, reprinted in [1974] U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 3946, 3950; see also H. Rep. No. 93-1051, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess. 7 (1974).Google Scholar
217 N.L.R.B. 765 (1975).Google Scholar
Id., at 767, citing 120 Cong. Rec. §12104 (1974).Google Scholar
It should be noted that the first proviso to section 9(b) entitles professional employees to separate representation from nonprofessional employees if they so desire it. 29 U.S.C. §159(b).Google Scholar
See Hasps, Mercy, of Sacramento, 217 N.L.R.B. 765 (1975): Nathan and Miriam Barnert Memorial Hosp., 217 N.L.R.B. 775 (1975); Newington Children's Hosp., 217 N.L.R.B. 793 (1975); St. Catherine's Hosp. of Dominican Sisters. 217 N.L.R.B. 787 (1975); and Sisters of St. Joseph of Peace, 217 N.L.R.B. 797 (1975).Google Scholar
223 N.L.R.B. 638 (1976).Google Scholar
224 N.L.R.B. 1349 (1976).Google Scholar
567 F.2d 588 (3d Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
Id. at 592.Google Scholar
570 F.2d 213 (7th Cir. 1978).Google Scholar
239 N.L.R.B. 872 (1978).Google Scholar
131 N.L.R.B. 909 (1961).Google Scholar
Allegheny Gen. Hosp. v. NLRB, 608 F.2d 965 (3d Cir. 1979).Google Scholar
NLRB v. Mercy Hosp. Assn. 606 F.2d 22 (2d Cir. 1979). cert. denied, 445 U.S. 971 (1980).Google Scholar
570 F.2d 213 (7th Cir. 1978).Google Scholar
567 F.2d 588 (3d Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
Mercy Hosp. Ass'n. 606 F.2d at 27.Google Scholar
601 F.2d 404 (9th Cir. 1979).Google Scholar
Bay Medical Center, Inc. v. NLRB. 588 F.2d 1174 (6th Cir. 1978).Google Scholar
NLRB v. Sweetwater Hosp. Ass'n, 604 F.2d 454 (6th Cir. 1979).Google Scholar
223 N.L.R.B. 251 (1976).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §152(3) (1976).Google Scholar
223 N.L.R.B. at 253.Google Scholar
229 N.L.R.B. 1000 (1977).Google Scholar
Id. at 1002.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center v. Committee of Interns and Residents, no. 7418/81 (New York Supreme Court, March 26, 1981) (the court denied a motion for a restraining order enjoining defendant from striking or picketing, holding that state court was without jurisdiction since NLRB had not ceded jurisdiction over hospital house staffs).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §152 (11).Google Scholar
229 N.L.R.B. at 1004, citing S. Rep. No. 93-766, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess. at 6 (1976).Google Scholar
H.R. 15842, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. (1976).Google Scholar
H.R. 2222, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. (1977).Google Scholar
H.R. 2222, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. (1979).Google Scholar
Physicians Nat'l House Staff Ass'n v. Fanning. 642 F.2d 492 (D.C. Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 101 S. Ct. 1360 (1981).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §158(g).Google Scholar
232 N.L.R.B. 443 (1977).Google Scholar
Id. at 444, citing Cong. Rec. S. 9641. May 2, 1974.Google Scholar
Id. at 444.Google Scholar
222 N.L.R.B. 212, enforcement denied sub. nom., NLRB v. District 1199, Nat'l Union of Hosp. & Health Care Employees, 556 F.2d 558 (2d Cir. 1976).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
227 N.L.R.B. 1630 (1977).Google Scholar
District 1199-E, Nat'l Union of Hosp. & Health Care Workers (Greater Pennsylvania Avenue Nursing Center, Inc.), 227 N.L.R.B. 132 (1976).Google Scholar
United Ass'n of Journeymen, Local 630 (Lein-Steenberg). 219 N.L.R.B. 837(1975).Google Scholar
Laborers’ Int'l Union, Local 1057 v. NLRB. 567 F.2d 1006 (D.C. Cir. 1977); NLRB v. IBEW Local 338 (Hoffman Co.), 548 F.2d 704 (7th Cir.), cert. denied. 434 U.S. 837 (1977).Google Scholar
Painters Local No. 452 (Henry C. Beck, Co.), 246 N.L.R.B. No. 148.Google Scholar
Id. at 12.Google Scholar