The Baptist Memorial Hospital

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 27, 1976

224 N.L.R.B. 201 (N.L.R.B. 1976)

THE BAPTIST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL 201
The Baptist Memorial Hospital and Local 150T, Ser-
vice Employees International Union , AFL-CIO,
Petitioner. Case 26-RC-4969
May 27, 1976
DECISION AND ORDER
By MEMBERS JENKINS, 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 Officer A Wayne
Barksdale of the National Labor Relations Board
Following the close of the hearing, the Regional Di-
rector for Region 26 transferred this case to the
Board for decision Thereafter, briefs were filed by
the Employer and the Intervenor I
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 prejudicial error They are hereby affirmed
Upon the entire record in this proceeding,' the
Board finds
1 The parties stipulated that the Employer,'
which operates a nonprofit hospital in Memphis,
Tennessee, and employs 4,000 people, has a gross an-
nual income in excess of $50 million, and during the
past year purchased supplies valued in excess of
$50,000 directly from outside the State of Tennessee
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act, and that it will effec-
tuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction
herein
2 The labor organizations involved claim to rep-
resent certain employees of the Employer
3 No question affecting commerce exists concern-
ing the representation of certain employees of the
Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act for the following reasons
The Employer's hospital facilities are housed in
numerous buildings in Memphis, most of which are
located in a central complex or campus situated be-
tween Madison and Union Avenues 4 The offices of
the Hospital's administrator are located there How-
i American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
AFL-CIO, was permitted to intervene
2 The Employer requested oral argument This request is hereby denied as
the record and the briefs adequately present the issues and the positions of
the parties
3 Hereafter also referred to as the Hospital
4 Hereinafter the hospital buildings located in this complex will be re-
ferred to as the Main Unit
ever, one of the Hospital's buildings, known as the
Lamar Unit, is located about 1 mile from the Main
Unit Approximately 150 of the Hospital's 4,000 em-
ployees are regularly assigned to work there
The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of approxi-
mately 119 service employees I regularly assigned to
the Lamar Unit The Employer and the Intervenor
oppose the petition, maintaining, inter aha, that only
a unit encompassing employees at all the Hospital's
facilities would be appropriate 6 They contend that
the Lamar Unit has no more separate operational or
functional identity than that of a separate floor or
wing at the Main Unit We agree
When the Employer commenced operations at the
Lamar Unit in 1962, it was utilized primarily as a
facility for long-term care for the aged In the years
since then, many programs and facilities have been
moved in and out of Lamar and it has now evolved
into a rehabilitative facility, having a spinal cord in-
jury unit, a stroke rehabilitation unit, a general reha-
bilitation unit, and a chronic hemodialysis unit As a
result of this rehabilitative function, 50 percent of
Lamar's patients are initially admitted to hospital fa-
cilities at the Main Unit (when their condition is
acute) and later transferred to Lamar when they are
in need of rehabilitation Upon such transfer, no ad-
ditional admittance procedure is required for the pa-
tient Patient care is further integrated by centraliza-
tion at the Main Unit of all recordkeeping, billing,
and insurance matters
Lamar currently has no operating room or other
facilities for the care of acutely ill patients, although
it has had them at times in the past Over the years,
as the operating requirements of the Hospital were
affected by changing demands for services or the
availability of additional space in newly constructed
buildings, various specialty units and functions have
been transferred into, or out of, Lamar When this
has happened, the affected employees often have
been transferred en masse along with their work to
the building to which the function was moved
Operationally, Lamar functions much as the
Hospital's other buildings, utilizing common pur-
chasing, engineering and power control, laundry, and
garage facilities with the hospital buildings at the
Main Unit
Labor relations policy and administration are
common to all hospital employees, including those at
Lamar The Main Unit personnel office interviews
5 The Petitioners requested unit is for all dietary, housekeeping nursing
service nursing assistant, floor secretarial and attending employees but
excluding all surgeons , RN s, LPN's, guards, professional employees and
supervisors as defined in the Act
The Employer also opposed the requested unit on the ground that it is
too narrow in terms of the employee classifications included therein How-
ever in view of the result reached herein, we need not , and do not consider
the Employer's other unit contentions
224 NLRB No 52
202 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
all prospective employees and all new employees re-
ceive their orientation at the Main Unit Further, all
employment and payroll records are centrally main-
tained and administered All employees, regardless
of the building to which they are assigned, receive
the same holidays and other fringe benefits, work the
same hours, and are paid on the basis of the same
wage scale Where seniority is a factor, employees are
credited with employment in all hospital areas, in-
cluding Lamar Many of the Lamar employees share
common overall supervision with employees who are
in the same department but are assigned to facilities
in the Main Unit
The degree of employee transfers between Lamar
and the Main Unit, both permanent and temporary,
appears to be massive Forty-seven percent of the
employees regularly assigned to work at Lamar pre-
viously worked at Main Unit facilities In the 5-year
period ending 1974, 121 employees transferred from
the Main Unit to Lamar, and 57 transferred in the
other direction Temporary transfers, on a daily ba-
sis, are also frequent For example, in the 11-month
period ending January 1975, the Main Unit nursing
service department provided relief employees to La-
mar on 109 occasions
In view of the above factors which clearly establish
functional and operational integration between the
Lamar Unit and the Main Unit, we find that a sepa-
rate bargaining unit limited to Lamar employees is
inappropriate'
Accordingly, and as the Petitioner has indicated
that it does not wish to participate in a unit broader
than the one petitioned for, we shall dismiss the peti-
tion herein
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein
be, and it hereby is, dismissed
7 See Mercy Hospitals of Sacramento, Inc 217 NLRB 765 (1975)