Allegheny General Hospital

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 13, 1975

216 N.L.R.B. 1001 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

ALLEGHENY GENERAL HOSPITAL 1001
Allegheny General Hospital and International Union
of Operating Engineers, Local 95-95A, AFL-CIO
and Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board. Case
AO-165
March 13, 1975
ADVISORY OPINION
BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, KENNEDY,
AND PENELLO
This is a petition for an advisory opinion filed on
January 6, 1975, by Allegheny General Hospital,
herein called the Employer , in conformity with
Sections 102.98 and 102 .99 of the Board's Rules and
Regulations, Series 8 , as amended , seeking a determi-
nation whether the Board would assert jurisdiction
over its operations . Thereafter , the Employer filed a
brief in support of its petition and International
Union of Operating Engineers , Local 95-95A,
AFL-CIO, herein called the Union , filed a statement
of position.
In pertinent part , the petition , brief, and statement
of position allege as follows:
1. The Union filed a petition for representation
with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board , herein
called the State Board, in Case PERA-R-1038-W,
seeking to represent certain employees of the
Employer . The State Board directed an election in a
unit of employees in the engineering and mainte-
nance division and, after the election , certified the
Union as the collective-bargaining representative.
The Employer objected to this unit determination on
constitutional grounds and thereafter sought relief
therefrom in the State courts which sustained the
State Board . Presently pending before the State
Board is a motion to vacate order in Case
PERA-R-1038-W because of lack of jurisdiction.
2. The Employer is a private nonprofit hospital
which provides care to sick and infirm persons in
Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania . Its gross annual revenues
for the fiscal year 1973-74, a period representative of
its operations , exceeded $ 10 million. During the same
period, the Employer purchased and received drugs
and other supplies from sources outside the Com-
monwealth of Pennsylvania valued in excess of
$25,000.
3. The State Board has made no findings with
respect to the aforementioned commerce data and it
is unknown whether the Union admits or denies such
data.
4. On January 17, 1975, the Union filed unfair
labor practice charges against the Employer with the
Board's Region 6 alleging violations of Section
8(aXl) and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act.
5. The Employer not only attacks the State
Board's unit determination, but also contends, in
effect, that the recent amendments 1 extending
coverage of the Act to nonprofit hospitals preempts
the State Board's jurisdiction and that since its
operations meet the Board's standards in the health
care field, the Board should advise that it would
assert jurisdiction over its operations, despite the
adverse unit pronouncements of the State Board and
courts.
6. In its statement of position, the Union con-
cedes that the Employer's operations are now subject
to the Board's jurisdiction but argues that the Board
should give full faith and credit to the unit determi-
nation made by the State Board and courts and
direct the Employer to bargain with the Union.
On the basis of the above, the Board is of the
opinion that:
(1) The Employer is a private nonprofit general
hospital which provides care to sick and infirm
persons in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
(2) Recent amendments to the National Labor
Relations Act2 extended the Board's jurisdiction to
nonprofit hospitals. The Board has previously assert-
ed jurisdiction over proprietary hospitals which come
within its statutory jurisdiction and have an annual
gross volume of $250,000.3 As the Employer here
meets our basic jurisdictional standard, and does a
gross volume of approximately $10 million which
meets any of our existing gross volume of business
standards and as its out-of-state purchases bring its
operations within our statutory jurisdiction, we
conclude that it would effectuate the policies of the
Act to assert jurisdiction herein.4 We leave to
subsequent adjudication the determination of the
precise monetary standard to be applied to nonprofit
hospitals .5
(3) We do not reach nor pass on the unit
contentions raised by the Employer in the State
Board and court proceedings or the Union's refusal-
to-bargain charges, as an advisory opinion is primari-
ly for determining whether an employer's operations
in commerce meet the Board's discretionary jurisdic-
tional standards.6 The question of appropriate unit
and the extent to which the State Board and court
determinations will be honored and the question of
I Pub. L. No. 93-360, effective August 25 , 1974. 4 See Yale-New Haven Hosplta( 214 NLRB No. 34 (1974).
7 Ibid.S Cf. Cornell University, 183 NLRB 329, 334 ( 1970).
3 Butte Medical Properties, d/b/a Medical Center Hospital, 168 NLRB 6 See Puerto Rico Labor Relations Board (Landrum Mills Hotel Corp.
266 (1967). d/b/a Hotel La Concha), 138 NLRB 1451 ( 1962).
216 NLRB No. 168
1002 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Union 's unfair labor practice charges are
substantive matters not resolvable in this proceed-
ing.7
Accordingly, the parties are advised, under Section
102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, that
on the allegations herein presented the Board would
assert jurisdiction over the operations of the Petition-
er with respect to labor disputes cognizable under
Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Act.
r Sec . 101.40(e) of the Board 's Statements of Procedure , Senes 8, as
amended ; see Yale-New Haven Hospltai supra