Advertisement

May 20, 2013

NLRB Facilitates Union Organization of Smaller Bargaining Units

In Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center of Mobile , 357 N.L.R.B. No. 83, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) addressed whether a petitioned-for unit consisting only of certified nursing assistants (CNAs) was an appropriate collective bargaining unit under the law. The controversy arose because the union sought only to organize the CNAs and exclude other nonsupervisory and nonprofessional service and maintenance employees at the non-acute healthcare facility. The employer urged that the other employees such as resident activity assistants and cooks should also be included within any proposed unit because of a reported community of interest. Continuing its recent trend of favoring organized labor, the Board departed from and expressly overruled its previous standard established in Park Manor Care Center, 305 NLRB 872 (1991), and created a new standard to determine what constitutes an appropriate bargaining unit in a non-acute healthcare facility.

Previously, under Park Manor Care Center, when making the determination of a proposed bargaining unit and assessing a union's desire to include certain groups of employees and exclude others at non-acute healthcare facilities, the Board inquired whether the interests of the group sought to be included are "sufficiently distinct from those of other employees" in order to exclude the other individuals. The Board limited the types of permissible bargaining units in such facilities to eight appropriate units. As a result, smaller units such as CNAs were deemed inappropriate.

However, in Specialty Healthcare the Board re-evaluated and overruled Park Manor and shifted the burden to employers to prove that the excluded employees share an "overwhelming community interest" with the petitioned-for employees. In overruling the Park Manor standard, the Board returned to an evaluation of non-acute facilities based on a traditional "community of interest" standard by assessing whether the bargaining units shared similar responsibilities, skills, training, supervisors, working conditions, and wages. Applying this newly articulated test, the Board held that CNAs clearly share a community interests and are unlike the Employer's other employees. Consequently, the Board held that the CNAs constituted an appropriate unit.

© 2013 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Barnes & Thornburg’s Labor and Employment Law Department is one of the fastest-growing labor groups in the nation. Two qualities set us apart: Our passion for what we do, and the pride we take in helping clients achieve their business goals. To succeed in the competitive global marketplace, our clients must not only meet but exceed their customers’ expectations. We share this objective, offering superior service, innovative ideas and an understanding of the challenges our clients face.

Our Services
The Labor and Employment Law group offers comprehensive...

317-231-7513

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.