Riverside Methodist Hospital

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 27, 1979

241 N.L.R.B. 1183 (N.L.R.B. 1979)

Pe-
9-RC-
I5 Em-
ployer, encom-
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF HJXTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
In Riverside Methodist Hospital, 223 NLRB 1084
was held before Hearing Oficer Felix C. Wade on (1976),
September 199 20, and 21, 1977. Following the hear-
ing, the National same unit it now
o~approximate~y 35 employees in 12job
8y as amended, the Regi0na1 for Regi0n
reconsidered the matter, particularly in view of
changes which have occurred in the petitioned-
for unit since our original decision, and we now find
rul- collective bargaining.z
jngs made at the hearing and finds that are free in recent decision in Allegheny Genera/ Hospj- from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby af- tal,, we explained at length why the congressional
in-
stitutions4
mainte-
0hio. the 12 months preceding the hearing, a
representative period, the gross revenue of the E ~ -
player exceeded $500,000. ~~~i~~ the same period, community-
the ~~~~l~~~~ purchased goods valued at more than
$50,000 from firms located outside the State of ohio, fully Satisfies legislative Concern unit
and caused such goods to be shipped directly from mentation in the health care industry. Thus, we
points outside the State of ohio to its facility in co- of
and working conditions; commonal-
of skills and supervision; frequently of contact
asser- with other employees; lack of interchange and func- -
the community-of-interest stan-
poli-
cies
Pe- persons-
400
concern-
9(c)(l) 2(6)
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a bargaining 50
by 2 the Chairman
known as the hospital's plant operations department,
-
'239 872
by the concerning ' S. Rept. 93-766,93d Cong. sess. (1974), "Legislative ist tor^
argu- Coverage Nonprofit Hospitals Under the National Labor Relations Act.
ment, presents 12; 93-1501, Cong. ~ s s . (1974),
274-275.
1183 RIVERSIDE METHODIST HOSPITAL
Riverside Methodist Hospital and International Union
of Operating Engineers, Local 589, AFL-CIO,
titioner. Case 12 167
April 27, 1979
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing
and pursuant to Section 102.67 of
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series
transferred this case to the National Labor Relations
Board for decision. Thereafter, the Employer and the
Petitioner filed briefs, and briefs on behalf of amici
curiae were filed by permission of the Board.'
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
firmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, including the
briefs of the parties and those of the amici curiae, the
Board finds:
I . The Employer is a nonprofit Ohio corporation
engaged in the operation of a hospital in Columbus,
lumbus. Inasmuch as these facts show that the Board
has legal jurisdiction over the Employer, and that the
Employer meets our discretionary standard for
tion of jurisdiction over nonprofit hospitals, we find
that the Employer is engaged in commerce within
meaning of the Act and that it will effectuate the
of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the
titioner is a labor organization as defined in the Act.
3. A question affecting commerce exists
ing the representation of employees of the Employer
within the meaning of Sections and and
(7) of the Act.
unit composed of all maintenance and powerhouse
employees employed the Employer in what is
We hereby grant the Employer's motion for the consideration of the case
the entire Board because of importance of the issue the
appropriate unit. However, we deny the Employer's motion for oral
as the record, including the briefs, adequately the issues and
the positions of the parties.
241 NLRB No. 184
but excluding all other employees, professional em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Such a unit would consist of about 50 employees in
roughly separate job classifications. The
however, contends that only a unit
passing all service and maintenance employees (more
than 1,100 employees in 32 departments) employed at
the hospital is appropriate. The Petitioner does not
desire to proceed to an election in this broader unit.
herein called Riverside I, the Board dismissed
a petition filed by the Petitioner for essentially the
seeks, except that it was then com-
posed classi-
fications. Nonetheless, the Board has now carefully
tain
cer -
that the unit sought is appropriate for purposes of
mandate against unit proliferation in health care
does not preclude the Board from finding
appropriate units composed exclusively of
nance employees in these facilities. In so doing, we
reviewed the legislative history of the 1974 health
care amendments to the Act, as well as Board unit
determinations in the field since that time, and con-
cluded that application of our traditional
of-interest criteria to determine appropriate units
regarding frag-
evaluate such factors as mutuality interest in
wages, benefits,
ity
tional integration; and area practice and patterns of
bargaining, in using the
dard to judge the appropriateness of bargaining units.
The Employer is a general community hospital
having 870 beds and employing some 2,500
an increase of approximately employees since the
time of the hearing in Riverside I. Although, as indi-
cated, the hospital classifies about 1,100 of these per-
sons in 32 departments as "service and maintenance"
employees, the record in our view establishes that the
roughly maintenance employees who make up the
For reasons given in their dissenting opinion in that car.
Fanning and Member Murphy would have found the unit petitioned for in
Riverside I to be appropriate.
2d 5 of the
of
1974" at p. H. Rcpt. 93d 2d 6-7 id. at pp.
1184
firemen,
Boiler-
elecrri-
alld
1 1
empl~yee) .~
recognition.of
grounds-
' set
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
plant operations department possess a well-defined
community of interest, which easily distinguishes
them from those workers who merely provide routine
support services for the Employer. In this regard, we
find that the maintenance employees have skills,
qualifications, and experience superior to that of ser-
vice employees, receive substantially higher wages,
work under separate supervision in a distinct depart-
ment, receive separate training, do not have meaning-
ful interchange with other employees, and generally
enter and advance within the department rather than
transferring to or from other departments.
We first examine the special skills, qualifications,
and experience required to perform most of the jobs
in the plant operations department. As at the time of
the hearing in Riverside I, the hospital employs five
now known as power plant operators. These
men, who must have an Ohio High-Pressure
Fireman's License, operate the boilers, chillers, and
related power plant equipment for the entire facility.
Although four of the five power plant operators work
only in the boiler area, the fifth relief operator also
works as a maintenance mechanic. The number of
skilled electronic technicians, who repair and maintain
sophisticated biomedical equipment and communica-
tions systems for the Employer, has increased from
one to three since Riverside I. Also, the Employer has
doubled, from three to six, its complement of
cians. These employees, who are required to have a
minimum of a year's electrical work experience, in-
stall, test. and repair electrical power circuits, parts,
and equipment. There are two carpenters, who install
shelving, assemble furniture, repair doors, hardware,
and furniture, and who even do some remodeling;
they also operate and maintain some power, wood,
and metalworking machinery. Four years or more of
carpentry experience is regarded by the Employer as
desirable for the performance of these varied duties.
The only plumber repairs installs gas, water, air,
steam, and waste disposal systems, and also does ma-
sonry, welding, concrete, and plaster work. For this,
the Employer demands a minimum of 2 years' experi-
ence. A fourth air-conditioning mechanic has been
added since Riverside I. These employees repair and
maintain the heating and air-conditioning fan units
and the supply and exhaust units, operate the absorp-
tion chillers and electric dryer chillers, and also moni-
tor chemical concentrations in the water supply sys-
tems. Air-conditioning mechanics should have craft
apprenticeship, technical training, or substantial work
experience to perform the job. The refrigeration me-
chanic, who must be experienced in his field, inspects,
repairs. and overhauls various types of refrigeration
equipment, including dietary equipment, blood refrig-
erators, deep freezers, icemakers, and kitchen appli-
ances. Since Riverside I, the Employer has increased
the number of maintenance mechanics from 2 to 5.
These mechanics are responsible for the general
maintenance and repair of all buildings and equip-
ment at the hospital, including ceilings, floors, walls,
light fixtures, appliances, beds, tables, wheelchairs,
and so forth. Craft apprenticeship or technical train-
ing, in addition to practical experience in mainte-
nance or construction, is required for the position.
The hospital now employs four painters, two more
than at the time of the hearing in Riverside I, who
paint walls and ceilings throughout the facility, and
also repair plaster, stencil signs, and strip and refinish
doors.
The foregoing craft, or craft-like, job classifications
account for all but about 9 of the approximately 50
employees in the plant operations department. The
only positions which can be said to be relatively un-
skilled are those of trade helper (four employees),
groundskeeper (two employees), storekeeper (one em-
ployee), department secretary (one employee), and
clerk-typist (one
It is instructive to constrast the skilled and special-
ized work done by the overwhelming majority of
maintenance employees with the duties performed by
employees in typical service classifications. Workers
in service jobs include laundry and housekeeping em-
ployees, cooks, food service employees, waitresses,
porters, window and wall washers, clerks, telephone
operators, and nursing assistants. Such positions de-
mand relatively little skill, training, or experience,
and involve routine, uncomplicated work.
Especially important to our finding that a unit lim-
ited to maintenance employees is appropriate is the
Employer's apparent their special sta-
tus, skills, and qualifications as reflected'in its wage
rates. Thus, the seven most highly skilled job classifi-
cations in the plant operations department, power
plant operator, refrigeration mechanic, air-condition-
ing mechanic, electrician, carpenter, plumber, and
maintenance mechanic, are filled by the 34 highest
paid employees among all 1,100 service and mainte-
nance employees. And only the X-ray service techni-
cians make as much as the electronic technicians.
Looked at another way, maintenance employees in all
the most highly skilled classifications, other than the
maintenance mechanics, earn from 30 to 70 percent
more than employees in various service classifications
except for X-ray service technicians; the maintenance
mechanics receive from 16 to 53 percent more in sala-
ries. Furthermore, the lowest skilled positions in the
maintenance department, trade helper,
keeper, storekeeper, secretary, and clerk-typist, re-
ceive compensation of from 8 to 18 percent more than
the least paid service classifications.
For the reasons fully forth below, the seasonal position of grounds
laborer should not be included in the unit.
hoc
e.g.,
app~opriate.~
'Allcghcny supro; McLean
(1978); Triniry Cudahy.
of Detm't, W.rr
1 Sec a180 Hebrew Rehabilitarion A& 230
dissenting mimpprehenb
W r a ,
grounds-
9(b)
guardsand
MEMBER
mt Cyanami'd Company, 131
(I%]). instant fin& mme
d i m t i n &
be Riwrside Truedale a y c s
reuons Rlversidr dimat.
General. changed appr*
remained srmc,
srme reasons.
har hcspilll
The Low Collgr 1135 (1978),
engineering
Land u here. department separately
received those rp
The easc
clkuifications numbers employed:
l a b o m ; helpem; Aremen; maintenance men; l a d
men; refrigerator
mechanics; enginms.
rcvuls classifications. ~ l l s
those
counc,
wllective-bargaining p u r p o ~ q u i m
l a
t h m utilizes appropriate-
'
RIVERSIDE METHODIST HOSPITAL 1185
Yet the special skills of maintenance employees
and the higher wages which they receive are not the
only factors which point to the appropriateness of a
separate unit of plant operations department workers.
Maintenance employees have long been organized by
the Employer into a separate administrative depart-
ment, for which a separate budget is prepared annu-
ally, and for which departmentwide policies and pro-
cedures have been established. The plant operations
department also has a separate supervisory hierarchy
under which all maintenance employees work. Since
the hearing in Riverside I, the ad committee estab-
lished to improve and facilitate communications be-
tween the administration and the maintenance em-
ployees has been made permanent. In addition, the
department has its own training program for employ-
ees which involves both on-the-job and classroom
training, and since Riverside I, the department has
given a course in electrical blueprint reading to inter-
ested employees.
Finally, the record shows also that there has been
no significant number of transfers of employees to or
from the maintenance department to service classifi-
cations, and little or no interchange between mainte-
nance and other employees. It is noteworthy, too, that
the Employer promotes from within the department
where possible, and gives employees from the depart-
ment first preference when vacancies arise. Most
maintenance employees wear distinct uniforms and
usually perform their duties alone or with other em-
ployees from their department.
We are not persuaded that the strong community
of interest among the employees of the plant opera-
tions department, which the foregoing demonstrates,
is vitiated by the presence of a small number of coun-
tervailing factors; a few of the maintenance em-
ployees are relatively unskilled, service and mainte-
nance employees receive the same fringe benefits, and
all hospital employees make use of a uniform griev-
ance procedure. In addition, we find that evidence
that 44 of 260 hospitals in the State of Ohio have
labor contracts which include service and mainte-
nance employees in a single unit falls far short of
establishing an area practice or pattern of bargaining.
We therefore conclude, as we have in a number of
cases where the facts justified a similar result, that a
unit composed of maintenance employees and power
plant operators at the hospital is
General Hospital, Hospital, 234 NLRB 424
Memorial Hospital of Inc., 230 NLRB 855 (1977);
Sinai Hospital Inc., 226 NLRB 425 (1976); Suburban Hospi-
tal, 224 NLRB 1349 (1976); St. Francis Hospital-Medical Center, 223 NLRB
145 (1976). Center for the NLRB
255 (1977).
Our colleague. Member Jenkins, the nature of
the majority decision in this cam. As noted above, and simply stated, we
hold that, under principles enunciated in Allegheny General Hospital, a
hospital maintenance unit may be appropriate. The applicable standard in
There still remains the issue of whether the classifi-
cation of groundslaborer should be included within
the description of the unit. The groundslaborer per-
forms essentially the same work, lawn mowing, shrub
trimming, etc., as the two groundskeepers, except that
groundslaborer is a seasonal position which is filled
only from April to October. Although the
laborer enjoys many of the same fringe benefits as
other maintenance employees, he receives less pay
than the groundskeepers, the lowest paid employees
in the department, and does not qualify for all bene-
fits, such as vacation time, because of the limited du-
ration of the job. The groundslaborer position has
been occupied by a different person in each of the last
5 years, as no one has returned to the job. Based on
these facts, we find that the groundslaborer should be
excluded from the bargaining unit, as he does not
share a sufficient community of interest with the other
maintenance employees.
Accordingly, we find that the following employees
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section
of the Act:
All maintenance and power house employees
employed by the Employer in what is known as
its plant operations department, excluding all
other employees, groundslaborers, professional
employees, supervisors as defined in
the Act.
[Direction of Election omitted from publication.]'
JENKINS, dissenting:
In Riverside Methodist Hospital, 223 NLRB 1084
evaluating this issue u forth in American NLRB
909 Our opinion in the case appropriate the unit
Chairman Fanning and Member Murphy, would have found to
appropriate in I. Member with thu decision for
the mt forth herein, and in the I See Allegheny
The alluded to in the instant cam merely add to the
priateness of the unit here; but, had the unit the we would
reach the result reached herein for the srme We note Member
Jenkins recently joined a cam 'finding appropriate a mainte-
nance unit in which Allegheny General was cited as the main support for the
holding. In Island Hospital, 239 NLRB the
Board directed that an election be held in a maintenance and
department very similar to the one herein. See 239 NLRB at 1138-40. In
Island, the maintenance was supervised,

and, as here, maintenance employees benefits similar to

ceived by all hospital employees.
maintenance unit in that included
the following job and of 2 incinerator
men; 8 5 6 36 3 mainte-
nance I mechanic; I preventative maintenance nun; 2
boiler and 5 watch Reference to the facts of this case
very similar Further, the functions and of em-
ployees in -Island are virtually identical to of employees included
in the instant unit. Compare also Allegheny General. We, of believe
that determining the appropriateness of a separate maintenance unit for
a case-by-cam analysis of the facts.
However, in view of the above wnaiderations, we frankly are at a to
identify criteria Member Jenkins in evaluating the
ness of maintenance units in the hospital area.
[Excelsior footnote omitted from publication.]
1186
dec~sion
hoc
case,8
PENELLO,
Hospital,lo silentio,
employees." -
Riversrde Merhodisr (1976),
b
'O
Peter Brigham Divisiun Aflliared Centers,
Inc., 1
Surfer Hospifols ofSarramenfo, Inc., I81
Association Anaherrn
161 Greafer Baker.$eld
( Sf. ( Baprisf Memor~al
Ho.~pItal, 199 Hosprfal.4ssociarion ojCincin-
nor; d / b / a
facilities.'*
~ c t
determinations.l3
employee^."'^
Hospital,15
conflict
depart-
l 2 S. 93-766. Cang. sess. 5 (1974).
at 93-1501.93d Cong. 2d sess. 6-7, 274-275.
supewis~on;
~ntegration;
supra
IJ 639-640 atTd.
(1976), F.2d (3d
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(1976) (Riverside I), the Board correctly found to be
inappropriate for purposes of collective bargaining
the maintenance unit requested by the Petitioner. The
same Petitioner again seeks to represent the same unit
of employees at the same hospital facility. For the
reasons given in the majority opinion in Riverside I, I
dissent from the Board's to reverse itself and
grant the unit at this time.
Although the majority in this case alludes to cer-
tain "changesw which have occurred in the mainte-
nance department since Riverside I, presumably mak-
ing the unit more appropriate today, 1 do not share
their view of these facts. Apparently the major
change in circumstances recited by the majority is
that new employees have been added in several classi-
fications, resulting in an increase in the size of the
unit from about 35 to 50 employees. But this fact is
without probative significance in the absence of a
showing that the additional employees possess greater
skills, experience, or qualifications than those com-
posing the Riverside I work force, or that these em-
ployees perform more complex tasks, or are less inte-
grated with the remainder of the hospital work force.
Otherwise, the majority notes only that an ad
maintenance department communications committee
has been made permanent since the hearing in the
original Riverside and that a course in electrical
blueprint reading has been given to interested mainte-
nance employees. But merely to state these two facts
discloses their tenuous nature, and constitutes an in-
adequate basis for the Board to conclude that a main-
tenance unit which was inappropriate earlier is now
appropriate.
MEMBER dissenting:
The unit of employees which the Petitioner seeks to
represent, and which the Board grants, is no more
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining now
than when the Petitioner unsuccessfully sought the
same unit more than 2 years
The Petitioner wants to represent a unit limited to
maintenance and powerhouse employees in a general
community hospital. The Board's decision allowing
this unit, along with its recent decision in Allegheny
General overrules, sub a long line
of cases in which we have refused to give hospital
maintenance employees a bargaining unit separate
from service Previously, in my dissenting
Other departments st Riverside also have communications committees.
Hospital, 223 NLRB 1084 herein calkd River-
side
239 NLRB 872 (1978).
Bent Hosprtal, a of the Hospital
23 NLRB 929 (1977); Northeastern Hospital, 230 NLRB 1042 (1977);
Community 227 NLRB (1976); Ana-
heim Memoriol Hospifal d / b / a Memorial Hosprtal, 227
NLRB (1976); Memorial Hospiral, 226 NLRB 971
1976); Joseph Hospifal, 224 NLRB 270 1976); The
224 NLRB (1976): The Jewish
Jewish Hospifal of Cincinnati. 223 NLRB 614 (1976).
opinion in Allegheny General Hospital, I set forth in
detail my reasons for deciding that units restricted to
maintenance employees in health care institutions are
generally inappropriate in light of the congressional
admonition against proliferation of bargaining units
in such I will not repeat them here. In
brief, however, 1 concluded that the legislature his-
tory of the 1974 amendments to the requires the
Board to take account of the public interest in limita-
tion of bargaining units in the health care industry,
instead of merely applying the traditional commu-
nity-of-interest criteria by which it normally makes
unit As a practical test, 1 stated that
separate units should be found appropriate in health
care institutions "only where the employees in the
proposed unit enjoy an exceptionally high degree of
community of interest among themselves, distinct and
apart from other Respecting the appro-
priateness of units composed of maintenance employ-
ees in particular, I quoted from my concurring opin-
ion in St. Vincent's
. . . a craft maintenance unit may be appropriate
when, viewed in light of all the criteria tradi-
tionally considered in determining the appropri-
ateness of maintenance units generally, its estab-
lishment does not with the congressional
mandate against proliferation of bargaining units
in the health care industry. This standard, which
is a more rigid one than is applied in other indus-
tries, can be met when the unit sought . . . is
composed of licensed craftsmen engaged in tra-
ditional craft work, which is performed in a sepa-
rate and distinct location apart from other em-
ployees in the health care facility. Normally,
such employees do not perform othef services
throughout the health care facility . . . and there
is, at most, minimal transfer or interchange to
and from the craft unit.
Therefore, placed in focus, the question in my view
is whether the facts in the instant case disclose that
this standard has been satisfied, and thus whether ap-
proximately 50 maintenance department employees
in a large hospital having more than 2,500 employees
should be accorded separate bargaining status apart
from nearly 1,100 service employees in 31
Rept. 93d 2d "Legislative History of the
Coverage of Nonprofit Hospitals Under the National Labor Relations Act,
1974" p. 12; H. Rept. id. at pp.
"As the majority correctly notes, these factors include mutuality of inter-
est in wages. benefits, and working conditions; commonality of skills and
frequency of contact with other employees; lack of interchange
and functional and area practice and patterns of bargaining.
"Allegheny General Hospital, at 896.
223 NLRB 638, (1976). in the summary judgment pro-
ceeding 227 NLRB 544 enforcement denied 567 588 Cir.
1977).
15
out.I6
em-
l6
room
1187 RIVERSIDE METHODIST HOSPITAL
ments. Contrary to the majority. I find that the main-
tenance workers do not have substantially higher
skills or wages than service employees: that they
spend the vast majority of their time working
throughout the hospital, often with employees from
other departments; that a significant number of em-
ployees have transferred to and from the maintenance
department; and that evidence concerning area prac-
tice and patterns of bargaining discloses that service
and maintenance employees are virtually always
grouped together for collective-bargaining purposes
in the State of Ohio. Further, the majority does not
contradict the record evidence that service and main-
tenance employees work essentially the same hours,
receive identical fringe benefits, have similar working
conditions, and are subject to the same hospitalwide
orientation program and grievance procedure. With-
out dispute, the record shows that labor relations and
personnel policies are determined centrally at the hos-
pital.
Turning first to the issue of the skills, qualifications,
and experience of the plant operations department
employees, this general observation is important: of
the 50 maintenance workers, only 5-the power plant
operators-hold jobs of sufficient complexity to re-
quire that they be licensed, and otherwise no mainte-
nance employee is required to possess, or does pos-
sess, even journeyman craft status. The apparent
reason for this, as the Board found in Riverside I and
as the record in the instant proceeding establishes, is
that plant operations department workers are respon-
sible largely only for routine, uncomplicated repair,
maintenance, and operation of equipment and facili-
ties at the hospital, while much of the major repair
and maintenance work is contracted out. It seems
that the Employer resorts to large-scale contracting
out because the in-house maintenance work force
lacks the ability to perform more complex tasks.
More specifically, the majority admits that the nine
employees occupying the positions of trade helper,
groundskeeper, storekeeper, department secretary,
and clerk-typist have little, if any, identifiable skill.
Also, the maintenance mechanics are actually
nothing more than handymen, who perform simple
repairs, requiring little ability, in all parts of the hos-
pital. Although the carpenters, plumbers, and paint-
ers certainly possess some specialized skill and experi-
ence, their duties essentially involve only routine
carpentry, plumbing work, and maintenance paint-
ing. Likewise, electricians, electronic technicians, air-
conditioning mechanics, and refrigeration mechanics
perform work demanding some degree of skill, but,
again, the more complicated tasks are generally con-
tracted In sum, about half the plant operations
department employees perform work requiring barely
any measurable skill, while the remainder, though
more skilled, nevertheless largely do routine, less
complex work. Although the number of employees in
the department has increased from about 35 to 50
since Riverside I, neither the nature of the tasks per-
formed by maintenance workers nor the skill required
to execute them has changed.
So far as wages are concerned, plant operations de-
partment employees generally receive somewhat
higher pay than those in service classifications, but
not significantly so. The best paid maintenance em-
ployees earn only 4 percent more than those in the
highest paid service classification, and there is little
difference in the rate of pay among service and main-
tenance employees in the lowest paid positions. All
service and maintenance employees are paid on an
hourly basis and on the same day of the week. Fi-
nally, employees are paid subject to a unified wage
program.
Benefits and working conditions for service and
maintenance employees are either the same or much
the same. These employees receive identical fringe
benefits, including vacation, holidays, free parking,
health and wage insurance, and shift differential. Ser-
vice and maintenance employees are also eligible on
the same basis for the Employer's pension plan.
Nearly all service and maintenance employees work
8-hour shifts, and there are three 8-hour shifts each
24-hour period for both sets of employees. On the
average, most maintenance employees spend only
about 20 percent of their time working in the mainte-
nance shop; they spend the remaining 80 percent of
their time working throughout the hospital complex,
frequently coordinating their work with service em-
ployees from various departments. All hourly paid
employees are required to punch timeclocks and to
wear identification badges. The Employer plans to es-
tablish a centralized locker facility which mainte-
nance employees and some service employees will
share.
The record indicates that the Employer's personnel
and labor relations policies are determined centrally,
rather than on a departmental basis. The personnel
office maintains employee records alphabetically,
rather than by department, and formally extends job
offers to applicants for employment. Job openings for
positions in all departments are posted throughout
the facility, and employees are eligible to apply for
positions opening up in any department. All new
Among the work done for the Employer by outside contractors are ma-
jor repairs to boiler and heating and air-conditioning quipment, and
also repair and maintenance work on much medical, laboratory. and X-ray
quipment, as well as major roofing repairs, special painting jobs, glass and
window replacement, etc.
ployees
1
of
I'
riod 1 mca-
surcd
that
I I R A DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
must participate in a uniform orientation pro-
gram, and all employees are subject to the same griev-
ance procedure. Transfer among departments is
common: 10 employees have transferred from other
departments to plant operations, and some mainte-
nance employees have transferred elsewhere.
I find little relevance in certain additional factors
stressed by the majority in reaching their conclusion.
Thus, for administrative convenience, budgets for all
departments. including the 3 service departments,
are submitted separately for approval, not merely
that of the maintenance department. Similarly, many
departments logically have statements of their own
policies and procedures relating to the function each
performs, and other departments also have communi-
cations committees. Although the maintenance de-
partment, like other departments, has an informal
training program. there is no apprenticeship training
as such, as employees are expected to learn their du-
ties through on-the-job training." Obviously. any de-
partment has its own supervisory hierarchy. If such
considerations are deemed to have critical signif-
icance, then the Board could just as well find that
each of the 31 service departments at Riverside con-
stitutes a unit appropriate for bargaining.
Finally, respecting area practice and patterns
The 12-hour course given in electrical blueprint reading during the pe-
since Riverside required no particular level of achievement as
by an examination or otherwise; certificates were issued to any em-
ployee who attended on a regular basis and "paid attention."
bargaining in the State of Ohio, the evidence is
44 of the approximately 260 hospitals in the State
have collective-bargaining agreements with unions es-
sentially covering both service and maintenance em-
ployees in a single unit. Indeed, the only maintenance
unit in an Ohio hospital is a residual unit. and is
therefore of no assistance in supporting an assertion
that a separate maintenance unit is appropriate.
Thus. this factor strongly militates against granting
the Employer's maintenance workers a separate unit.
In conjunction with Allegheny General Hospital, su-
pra, this decision reverses the well-settled trend of the
Board to find that maintenance employees in a hospi-
tal do not usually enjoy an exceptionally well-defined
community of interest which would entitle them to a
separate unit in light of the expressed legislative in-
tention to limit the proliferation of units in the health
care industry. Perhaps the most graphic illustration of
how far the Board has departed from its previous pol-
icy is that we found inappropriate a maintenance unit
consisting of 90 percent journeyman level craftsmen
in Jewish Hospital of Cincinnati, supra, but in the in-
stant case the Board allows a maintenance unit in the
absence of any employees having journeyman level
skill. In short, the majority has chosen to grant the
maintenance unit requested by the Petitioner, in spite
of a mountain of precedent to the contrary and in the
face of facts showing unusually little justification for
permitting plant operations department employees to
bargain on a separate basis.
I therefore dissent.