Perkins School for the Blind

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 14, 1976

225 N.L.R.B. 1293 (N.L.R.B. 1976)

PERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND
Perkins School for the Blind and Perkins Professional
Teachers Organization, Petitioner . Case 1-RC-
14192
September 14, 1976
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS PENELLO
AND WALTHER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Office Francis X.
McDonough of the National Labor Relations Board
on January 29 and 30 and February 11, 1976. Fol-
lowing the hearing and pursuant to Section 102.67 of
the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Reg-
ulations, Series 8, as amended, and by direction of
the Regional Director for Region 1, this proceeding
was transferred to the Board for decision. Thereafter,
the Employer and the Petitioner filed briefs.
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 Officer's rul-
ings made at the hearing and finds that they are free
from prejudical error. They are hereby affirmed.
The Petitioner seeks to represent certain employ-
ees of the Employer. The parties have stipulated to
the composition of the various units as well as to
those positions to be excluded.' The sole issue for
determination is whether or not the Board should
assert jurisdiction over the Employer, a nonprofit
corporation which operates a school for blind and
deaf-blind students.
The Employer contends that the Board should de-
cline to assert jurisdiction because the Employer
functions as an adjunct to the public school system
and provides services which are intimately connected
with an exempt function of state and local govern-
ment, that is, the education of blind and deaf-blind
children.
Perkins School for the Blind is a nonprofit corpo-
ration created by special act of the Massachusetts
General Court (Legislature) in 1829. The school pro-
vides residential and day programs for blind and
deaf-blind students from kindergarten through high
school and vocational rehabilitation programs for
' We grant the motion of the Employer and the Petitioner to reopen the
record for the purpose of receiving a joint stipulation concerning the status
of the positions of parent counselor and social worker The stipulation is
received into evidence We deny Petitioner's motion for consideration by
the full Board
1293
visually handicapped young adults. It is located on a
34-acre campus in Watertown, Massachusetts. The
school is governed by a board of 12 trustees, of
whom 4 are appointed by the Governor of the Com-
monwealth, and 8 are elected by members of the cor-
poration, who also choose the officers of the corpora-
tion. The board of trustees appoints the director, who
has general supervision of the school. In addition,
there is a board of visitors, consisting of the Gover-
nor, Lieutenant Governor, President of the Senate,
Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the
Chaplains of the Legislature, which has authority to
visit the school to inspect the establishment, examine
the bylaws and regulations, and generally see that the
object of the institution is carried into effect.
At the present time, the school is subject to chapter
766 of the act of 1972 enacted by the Legislature.
Chapter 766 places upon the local school committees
the responsibility of providing or arranging for a spe-
cial education program to meet the needs of school
age children with special needs. In the event that a
local school committee recommends that a child be
placed at Perkins, the regional branch office of the
Department of Education, Division of Special Edu-
cation (SPED), determines whether referral is appro-
priate and decides whether to approve placement at
Perkins, or any other approved special education
school. By law, the Department of Education may
approve the referral of children requiring special
education "to any institution within or without the
Commonwealth which offers curriculum, instruction,
and facilities which are appropriate to the child's
needs and which are approved by the department
. .. . The curriculum at such an institution must for
approval be equivalent, insofar as the department
deems feasible, to the curriculum for children of
comparable age and ability in the public schools of
the commonwealth." 2 The aforementioned section
also provides that the expenses of the instruction and
support actually rendered or furnished to such chil-
dren, including their necessary traveling expenses
may be paid by the Commonwealth, and further the
Department of Education "shall direct and supervise
the education of all such children, and the commis-
sioner of education shall state in his annual report
their number, the cost of their instruction and sup-
port, the manner in which the money appropriated
therefor has been expended, to what extent reim-
bursed and such other information as he deems im-
portant." J
If a school committee recommends that a child be
sent to Perkins, and SPED approves the recommen-
dation, the school committee may enter into a con-
Z Acts, 1972, chap 766, chap 71 B, sec 10
/bid
225 NLRB No. 187
1294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tract with Perkins. However, -under regulations pro-
mulgated to implement chapter 766, before any
school committee may enter into an agreement with
Perkins for the education of a child, Perkins must
first be approved on an annual basis by a regional
review board, which is chaired by the director of the
regional branch office of SPED. In order to be ap-
proved, a school must submit information concern-
ing, inter aha, its physical plant, methods, and per-
sonnel used for evaluating school children in need of
special education services, specific qualifications of
professional and nonprofessional personnel, instruc-
tional equipment, library facilities, health care provi-
sions, enrollment , and requirements for admission.
In addition, the school is required to submit a com-
plete specific description of the education and treat-
ment services which it is prepared to offer school age
children in need of special education services as well
as the educational plans for all school age children in
need of special education services currently placed in
the institution under the regulations, along with a
progress report on all such children. Before approval
can be granted, the regional review board must re-
view the information submitted and make an onsite
visit. The regulations state that contracts between
school committees and private schools must meet
certain requirements. The private school must agree
to implement all elements of the child's educational
plan, and must periodically report to the administra-
tor of special education on the progress of the child.
The Employer presently provides special educa-
tion for 263 blind and deaf-blind students, 157 of
whom are residents of Massachusetts. All but 31 of
the student population reside on the campus of the
school. No Massachusetts students pay tuition. Al-
though Perkins would admit a student from Massa-
chusetts whose tuition was not paid by the Common-
wealth or its subdivisions, no Massachusetts student
has attended the school as a private student since
1968. Ninety-five students were sent to Perkins pur-
suant to contracts entered into between Perkins and
other States or their political subdivisions, which pay
the tuition for such students. One student from Alas-
ka is similarly supported by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Other
States or their political subdivisions generally require
proof of the Commonwealth's approval of Perkins as
a school furnishing special education as a condition
of sending their own children to the school. The only
students not publically supported are eight from
other States and two foreign students.
The tuition that the school may charge the Com-
monwealth or its subdivisions is determined by a
state agency, the Rate Setting Commission, which
has not approved Perkins' request for increased tu-
ition rates. In accordance with Perkins' agreement
with other States and their agencies, Perkins may not
charge other States more than it charges the Com-
monwealth of Massachusetts.
The total current income of the school for the fis-
cal year ending on August 31, 1975, was $4,323,265.4
Of the total, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
and its subdivisions paid $1,246,929 for tuition fees,
and $217,602 for other fees. Other States and their
subdivisions paid $822,752 for tuition fees and
$48,893 for other fees. The Federal Government paid
$8,000 for tuition fees, and private tuition payments
amounted to $40,679. The school also received
$588,383 in grants from the Federal Government un-
der Title VI of the Federal Elementary and Second-
ary Education Act. The school also realized private
income amounting to $1,350,030, of which
$1,181,872 was investment income.
Perkins also operates the Howe Memorial Press
which manufactures braillers, typewriter-like writing
devices for the blind, and other writing apparatus for
the blind and does braille printing of books and mu-
sic It employs approximately 50 persons, who work
in a separate building on the school's campus and
under separate supervision from the academic activi-
ties of the school. The primary purpose of the Howe
Press is to make available to all blind persons, wher-
ever they may be, embossed books and tangible ap-
paratus to enable them to read and write. The funds,
accounts, and payroll of the Press are kept separate
from those of the school. For the fiscal year ending
August 31, 1975, the Press had gross sales of
$1,158,063, and sustained an operating loss of
$14,917.
In view of the foregoing and the record as a whole,
it is clear the Employer's school for the education
of blind and deaf-blind children functions as an ad-
junct to the Massachusetts school system in provid-
ing educational opportunities to the handicapped
children who are residents of the Commonwealth.' In
utilizing the Employer's school for this purpose, as
well as other private schools performing special edu-
cation functions, the Commonwealth's school system
meets its statutory obligations to provide educational
opportunities to handicapped children which its pub-
lic school system may not be equipped to provide
through its own facilities. Thus, as the Board found
in Overbrook School for the Blind, supra, the
Employer's school has a special relationship to the
public school system which, through the Department
of Education, exercises substantial and direct control
This figure does not include income received from operations of the
Howe Memorial Press , to be discussed infra
5 See Overbrook School for the Blind, 213 NLRB 511 (1974). and Pennsyl-
vania School for the Deaf. 213 NLRB 513 (1974)
PERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND
over the school's operation. Although in form the
Employer is a nonprofit corporation operating a pri-
vate school, the thrust of its educational activities is
to supplement the school facilities and educational
program of the public school system. In view of the
above, we decline to assert jurisdiction over the oper-
ations of the Employer because the Employer oper-
ates as an adjunct to the public school system and
thus shares the exemption of the public schools from
the coverage of the Act. We shall therefore dismiss
the petition.'
ORDER
1295
It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
6 The Petitioner contends that the Howe Press is a commercial enterprise
and the Board should therefore assert jurisdiction over the Employer We
reject that contention Whether or not the Board would assert jurisdiction
over the Howe Press is not in issue here , for it is clear that the Howe Press
is a distinct entity and its operations do not affect , and are not affected by,
our decision to decline jurisdiction over the school