Ithaca College

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 30, 1982

261 N.L.R.B. 577 (N.L.R.B. 1982)

ITHACA COLLEGE
Ithaca College and Ithaca College Faculty Associ-
ation, NYSUT-AFI, Petitioner. Case 3-RC-
7896
April 30, 1982
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held on 27 days beginning December
15, 1980, and concluding February 26, 1981, before
Hearing Officers Doren G. Goldstone and Michael
Cooperman, respectively. Following the hearing,
and pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations,
Series 8, as amended, the Regional Director for
Region 2 transferred this case to the Board for de-
cision. Thereafter, the Employer and Petitioner
filed briefs. 1
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officers'
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They are hereby af-
firmed.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board finds:
1. The Employer was stipulated by the parties to
be engaged in commerce within the meaning of
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. We find that it will
effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert juris-
diction herein.
2. The Ithaca College Faculty Association,
NYSUT-AFT, is not a labor organization within
the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 2
3. No question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation of employees of the Em-
ployer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all full-
time faculty employed by Ithaca College at its
Ithaca, New York, location and at the Albert Ein-
stein Medical Center in New York City, including
professional librarians and those faculty members
possessing professional staff appointments, but ex-
cluding all guards, confidential employees, part-
time faculty, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
The College, however, contends that the faculty
' The Employer also filed a request for oral argument. We hereby
deny this request as the record and the briefs adequately present the
issues and positions of the parties.
' In light of our finding, infra, that the faculty members seeking repre-
sentation are managerial employees, and since it appears that Petitioner is
comprised solely of the managerial employees involved herein, we find
that Petitioner does not represent statutory employees and therefore is
not a labor organization within the meaning of the Act.
261 NLRB No. 83
members are managerial employees within the
meaning of N.LR.B. v. Yeshiva University, 444 U.S.
672 (1980), and that the department chairpersons
are supervisors. For the reasons set forth below,
we shall dismiss the petition.
The College is a private, nonprofit institution of
higher education comprised of six schools 3 and the
Division of Graduate Studies, Education, and Con-
tinuing Education. A central administrative hierar-
chy is ultimately governed by the Board of Trust-
ees. The president of the College is a member of
the Board of Trustees, and is assisted by a provost,
who is the chief academic officer of the College, a
treasurer-controller, and vice presidents for student
affairs, business affairs, and college relations and re-
source development. A collegewide Academic
Policy Committee is composed of three representa-
tives from each school-a faculty member (selected
by the school's faculty), the dean, and a student.
The library director also sits on this committee,
which reviews proposals made by the faculties of
the various schools concerning changes in aca-
demic policy or curriculum. The committee has no
authority either to initiate such proposals or to fi-
nally reject them, but may return a proposal to the
school for clarification or revision. The commit-
tee's work is carried out in substantial part by two
subcommittees which are composed entirely of fac-
ulty members. Thus, the various school's curricular
proposals are considered by the Curriculum
Review Subcommittee, and collegewide academic
policy issues are reviewed by the Policy Subcom-
mittee. The recommendations of these faculty sub-
comittees invariably have been followed by the
committee.
Once a proposal has been approved by the Aca-
demic Policy Committee, it is submitted to the
Faculty Council for consideration. The Council is
an elected body composed of faculty representa-
tives of each academic unit. In addition to consid-
ering proposals forwarded to it by the Academic
Policy Committee, the Council conducts the elec-
tions of faculty members who serve on the several
collegewide committees, and reviews the recom-
mendations made by such committees.
Each of the schools also has various faculty
committees of its own which are free to and have
established a wide range of policies affecting their
own operations. In some schools such policymak-
ing is conducted in subcommittees, while in others
the entire faculty participates directly. The decision
whether to operate through subcommittees or some
other formal structure is left to the faculty of each
s These are the Schools of music; Humanities and Sciences; Allied
Health Professions; Business; Health, Physical Education and Recreation;
and Communications.
577
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
school. In each of the schools and the one division,
the faculty determines the curriculum. It decides
what courses will be offered, and the credit hours,
class size, and prerequisites for each. The faculty
has the authority to modify or add to the curricu-
lum. In some schools, faculty recommendations re-
garding curricular changes require the approval of
the dean; such approval, however, is routinely
forthcoming. In the School of Humanities and Sci-
ences, for example, the dean has approved every
one of an estimated 500 such recommendations
made to him by the faculty. The faculties schedule
courses and determine teaching assignments. The
faculties also set academic policies, and individual
schools are empowered to adopt provisions which
are more restrictive than those applicable col-
legewide. In this regard, policies relating to aca-
demic standing, graduation requirements, grading,
attendance, course distribution requirements, and
examinations are effectively determined by the fac-
ulties, and policies in these areas cannot be imple-
mented without faculty approval. The various fac-
ulties also control the admission of students into
their respective schools. They are free to establish
admissions standards higher than those prescribed
for the College generally, and some schools have
done so.
The authority of the faculties also extends
beyond the strictly academic areas discussed above.
The College's faculties effectively control faculty
hiring and tenure. Thus, virtually all of their rec-
ommendations to the administration (typically a
dean) with respect to such matters have been fol-
lowed. Faculty authority in hiring has extended not
only to the filling of faculty positions, but also to
the selection of administrators as well; faculty
search committee recommendations have been ef-
fective in the selection of deans in each of the six
schools. The criteria for tenure and promotion are
developed by the faculty within each school, and
each has a faculty committee which makes recom-
mendations to the dean of the school. The dean
then adds his own recommendations and forwards
the candidate's file to the College Tenure and Pro-
motion Committee. This committee, established in
1977 at the recommendation of the president, re-
views all tenure and promotion recommendations.
It is composed of five faculty members. The com-
mittee prepares a recommendation and sends the
file to the provost, who also makes a recommenda-
tion and then submits the file to the president for
consideration and final approval by the Board of
Trustees. Since its creation, the committee has re-
viewed 47 tenure candidates and 73 promotion can-
didates. Its recommendations have been followed
in 119 of the 120 cases.
The faculties participate in the formulation of
their budgets and also effectively determine which
incoming undergraduate students will receive fi-
nancial aid in some schools, and which students
will receive teaching assistantships in others. The
faculties have also played an effective role in plan-
ning and designing new facilities and modifications
to the existing physical plant. Effective faculty rec-
ommendations have led to construction of a new
building for the school of Allied Health Profes-
sions, renovation and construction of new facilities
for the School of Humanities and Sciences, and a
variety of other smaller projects.
In Yeshiva, the Supreme Court found that the
faculty effectively determined the curriculum,
grading system, admission and matriculation stand-
ards, academic calendars, and course schedules.
The Court additionally noted that the faculty's au-
thority extended beyond strictly academic areas to
such matters as hiring, tenure, sabbaticals, termina-
tions, and promotions. Although the administration
retained the power to make final decisions, the
Court found that the overwhelming majority of
faculty recommendations were followed. Based on
its findings, the Court held that the faculty mem-
bers in Yeshiva exercised managerial authority and
thus did not constitute an appropriate unit.
We find that the faculty here possesses and exer-
cises authority similar to that possessed and exer-
cised by the faculty in Yeshiva. Thus, the record re-
veals that the faculties of each of the College's
schools and the Division of Graduate Studies have
extensive authority to formulate and effectuate
policies for their respective schools, both through
their individual school committees and through
participation in the larger college scheme of gover-
nance involving the Academic Policies Committee
and the college Faculty Council. The Employer
has demonstrated that the faculty has absolute au-
thority as to the College's curriculum, including
course offerings, prerequisites, credit hours, class
size, course schedules, and faculty teaching assign-
ments. The faculty also determines the College's
academic policies concerning, inter alia, admissions
standards, academic standing, graduation require-
ments, grading, attendance, course distribution re-
quirements, and examinations. In addition, the fac-
ulty possesses substantial authority in spheres
beyond the strictly academic. Thus, the faculty
controls the hiring of faculty, as well as deans, and
faculty tenure, and has an effective voice in budg-
etary matters and facilities planning. In view of all
of the foregoing, and the record as a whole, we
find that the unit sought by Petitioner is composed
578
ITHACA COLLEGE
of managerial employees.4 Accordingly, we shall
dismiss the petition.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition herein be,
and it hereby is, dismissed.
I Since we have concluded that the faculty members are managerial ment chairpersons are supervisors within the meaning of Sec. 2(11) of the
employees, we find it unnecessary to reach the issue of whether depart- Act.
579