No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Construction Picketing Notices to Health Care Institutions: The National Labor Relations Board Alters its Approach
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Extract
In the health care field, the concept of protected employee activity under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) must be balanced against the need to avoid the disruption of patient care. Congress acknowledged the need to balance these competing concerns when it included Section 8(g) within the 1974 Health Care Institution Amendments to the NLRA.
Section 8(g) establishes a notification procedure with which a labor organization must comply before commencing a strike or other concerted work-stoppage. In an effort to ameliorate the threat which an unannounced and unanticipated stoppage of work poses to the delivery of health care, Section 8(g) requires that a labor organization provide the health care institution and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service with written notice specifying the date and time of any strike, picketing, or other work-stoppage at least ten days in advance of the planned activity.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1981
References
NLRA §8(g), 29 U.S.C. §158(g).Google Scholar
Pub. L. No. 93-360, 88 Stat. 395 (1974), codified at 29 U.S.C. §§152, 158, 169, 183 (Supp. V 1975). These amendments removed a federal statutory exemption of private non-profit hospitals from coverage by the NLRA. Proprietary hospitals had never been exempted, and the National Labor Relations Board had originally had jurisdiction over nonprofit hospitals as well, prior to the 1947 Taft-Hartley Amendments.Google Scholar
NLRA §8(g), 29 U.S.C. §158(g).Google Scholar
S. Rep. No. 766, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. (1974).Google Scholar
NLRA§10(j), 29 U.S.C.§160(j).Google Scholar
NLRA §2(3), 29 U.S.C. §152(3).Google Scholar
NLRA §8(g), 29 U.S.C. §158(g).Google Scholar
United Ass'n of Journeymen Local 630 and Lein-Steenberg, 219 N.L.R.B. 837, 89 L.R.R.M. 1770, enforcement denied, 567 F.2d 1006, 96 L.R.R.M. 3160 (D.C. Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
United Ass'n of Journeymen Local 630, supra note 9; Laborers” International Union Local 1057 and Mercy Hosp. of Laredo, 219 N.L.R.B. 846, 89 L.R.R.M. 1777 (1975), enforcement denied, 567 F.2d 1006, 96 L.R.R.M. 3160 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (companion case to United Ass'n of Journeymen Local 630); International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 388 and St. Joseph's Hosp. of Marshfield, 220 N.L.R.B. 665, 90 L.R.R.M. 1390 (1975), enforcement denied sub nom. NLRB v. IBEW Local 388, 548 F.2d 704, 94 L.R.R.M. 2536 (7th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 837, 96 L.R.R.M. 2514 (1977).Google Scholar
NLRB v. IBEW Local 388, supra note 10.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Laborer's International Union Local 1057 and Mercy Hosp. of Laredo, supra note 10 (calling the conclusion of Local 388 “eminently correct”).Google Scholar
Painters Local 452 and Henry C. Beck Co., 246 N.L.R.B. No. 148, 103 L.R.R.M. 1002 (1979).Google Scholar
Bricklayers Local 40 and Lake Shore Hosp., 252 N.L.R.B. No. 30, 105 L.R.R.M. 1317 (1980).Google Scholar
105 L.R.R.M. at 1318.Google Scholar
Orange Belt Dist. Council of Painters No. 48 and St. Joseph's Hosp., 243 N.L.R.B. No. 113, 101 L.R.R.M. 1456 (1979).Google Scholar
101 L.R.R.M. at 1459, n. 7, citing 120 Cong. Rec. S7310 (daily ed., May 7, 1974).Google Scholar
101 L.R.R.M. at 1458.Google Scholar
Id. at 1459.Google Scholar
Laborer's International Union Local 1252 and St. Mary's Hosp. of Roswell, 248 N.L.R.B. 244, 103 L.R.R.M. 1526 (1980).Google Scholar
248 N.L.R.B. at 247.Google Scholar
Id. at 247, citing Orange Belt Dist. Council and St. Joseph's Hosp., supra note 16.Google Scholar
Sheet Metal Workers Local 324 and Lake Shore Hosp., 254 N.L.R.B. No. 64, 106 L.R.R.M. 1140 (1981).Google Scholar
106 L.R.R.M. at 1140.Google Scholar
Bricklayers Local 40 and Lake Shore Hosp., supra note 14.Google Scholar
Sheet Metal Workers Local 324 and Lake Shore Hosp., 106 L.R.R.M. at 1141.Google Scholar