Case Study in Unfair Labor Practice
Labor unions have been in decline over the last few decades. However, labor unions in the healthcare industry have been in the news recently, in particular, large and well-funded nursing unions. Sanders and McCutcheon (2010) point out that there is a sense of urgency among nursing unions in large numbers and that nurses in these unions aren’t just concerned about wages, hours and benefits, but patient care and nurse patient ratios. This issue is a key factor in the 2013 case of New York State Nurses Associations v. Olean General Hospital. In this case, the union, the New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA) filed a complaint that Olean General Hospital (OGH) had violated Section 8(a)(1) in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) which is the interference with employees’ Section 7 rights and Section 8(a)(5), failure to engage in good faith collective bargaining duty with certified unions. This paper will look at the case, the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) decision and why it had merit.
New York State Nurses Association v. Olean General Hospital
In 2013 NYSNA filed charges against OGH alleging that the hospital had violated Sections 8(a)(1) and (5) by implementing the Dedicated Education Unit (DEU), a program where nurses in the bargaining unit acted as clinical teachers for Alfred State University. The main issue with the program was that the union believed it was significantly different than other programs the hospital had with other nursing school programs and therefore required notice and the opportunity with the union. The union requested more information regarding the program including whom the bargaining unit nurses would receive orders from, the type of training they would be provided and the weekly expectations of the bargaining unit nurses. The hospital refused to provide specific information about the program and the union only learned the details of the program after a nurse in the bargaining unit provided a copy of the letter from Alfred State University with details of the program. The letter explained that the nurses selected would be an Alfred State representative as well as an employee of OGH. Additionally, the selected would be required to attend a mandatory orientation. Seven RNs in the bargaining unit were selected and were supposed to be with their students for 36 hours every two week pay period and received $1,000 from Alfred State in addition to the wages. The union argued that while the hospital had other agreements that were not negotiated by the union, the DEU was different because the RNs were required to sign agreements, were paid by the school, and were required to attend training by the school. The second part of the complaint involved a Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) unannounced survey where 40-43 deficiencies were found involving patient care. NYSNA had requested a copy of the report and received a reply from the hospital VP that their request had been referred to hospital attorneys and provided no further response. The hospital argued that they did not need to provide a copy of the report to the union because it was not relevant to union responsibilities.
NRLB Findings and Decision The NLRB found that the DEU program was sufficiently different from other arrangements made between the hospital and nursing schools. Thus the hospital was obligated to provide the union with prior notice and the opportunity to bargain over the implementation of the program. The NLRB also disagreed with the hospital regarding the JCAHO report and argued that it was relevant to the Union’s responsibilities since the deficiencies may be related to staffing issues which had been a major issue in ongoing contract negotiations. Therefore, the NLRB decided that union was entitled to the JCAHO report and a list of the deficiencies found in the survey. The NLRB determined that by failing to notify the union about the DEU program in a timely manner and provide it the chance to bargain about the decision, OGH violated 8(a)(1) and (5) because the program was not part of the collective bargaining agreement. Additionally, OGH violated 8(a)(1) and (5) by refusing to bargain in good faith with the union by not providing the union with relevant information it requested regarding the DEU and the JCAHO survey. The NLRB ordered that OGH cease and desist from these actions as well as furnish the additional information the union had requested and allow the union to bargain. Finally, OGH was required to post a notice throughout the hospital stating that the NLRB found the hospital had violated labor law.
Analysis and Merit of NYSNA v. OGH
Clearly the case NYSNA had against OGH had merit. To understand the reasoning behind filing the complaint, it is important to understand at the negotiations that were going on between NYSNA and OGH at that time. This section will look at the events involved with the negotiations, why the case against OGH had merit, and the effects the decision had on the workplace. The DEU program violated Section 8(a)(5) because the hospital had taken unilateral action on a matter subject to bargaining. Kubasek, Brennan and Browne (2012) point out that giving employees a raise or additional benefits during the term of collective bargaining without first consulting with the union is an example of this because the behavior would have the effect of undermining the union as a bargaining representative and is therefore unlawful. When the DEU was implemented, OGH and NYSNA were in the middle of ongoing and lengthy contract negotiations.
Additionally, one of the main issues involved in the negotiations was staffing levels. When negotiations broke down, NYSNA engaged in a public awareness campaign that called for improved staffing levels at OGH. The union maintained that the number of nurses working at the hospital were too low, forcing nurses to care for more patients than they could safely handle and sometimes nurses had to work in units they not been properly trained to work in (Michel, 2014). Thus, it was appropriate for the union to request a copy of the JCAHO report and survey results to see if the deficiencies were due to staffing issues, a major issue that caused the impasse in reaching a new contract.
While the decision made by the NLRB was in favor of the union, determining that the hospital was in violation of Section 8a(1) and (5), it ultimately helped rather than harm the business environment. Christopher Michel (2014) reported that after 17 months of negotiations and an impasse, the hospital and union came to terms on a new five year contract that focuses on safe staffing guidelines including the amount of staff and what kind of staff needs to be in each unit. Additionally advanced training and certifications for nurses will be provided as well as tuition reimbursement for RNs that want to pursue a higher degree.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the NLRB made the right decision when ruling in favor of NYSNA and finding OGH in violation of Section 8a(1) and (5). By not allowing the union to review the DEU or the JHACO report and survey, the hospital had violated the sections and participated in unfair labor practices. However the decision ultimately helped the nurses in collective bargaining process which lead towards better staffing of nurses in the new five year contract. Ultimately, this will help, not harm the business environment at OGH.
References
Kubasek, N., Brennan, B. & Browne, M. (2012). The legal environment of business: A critical thinking approach (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Michel, C. (2014). OGH, nurses’ union agree on new contract. Olean Times Herald. Retrieved from: http://www.oleantimesherald.com/news/here_and_now/article_7c21f870-c639-11e3-b82c-001a4bcf887a.html
New York State Nurses Association v. Olean General Hospital, 03-CA-097918 (2013).
Sanders, G. and McCutcheon, A. (2010). Unions in the healthcare industry. Labor Law Journal, 61(3), 142-151.