Union Hospital of New Bedford, Inc.

UNION HOSPITAL OF NEW BEDFORD, INC. 371 Union Hospital of New Bedford, Inc. and Building Service Employees' International Union, Local 254, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 1-RC-11172 November 1, 1970 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS BROWN AND JENKINS Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Stephen S. Lewen- berg on July 15, 1970. Pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations and Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as amended, this case was transferred to the National Labor Relations Board for decision. Thereafter, the Employer filed a brief. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel. The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. The Employer operates a proprietary hospital in New Bedford, Massachusetts. The Petitioner seeks a unit of all the laboratory technicians employed by the Employer, but excluding all other employees, admin- istrative employees, guards, and supervisors as de- fined in the Act. The Employer takes the position that the only appropriate unit is one including all hourly nonsupervisory employees. There is no bargaining history for any of the hospital employees.) The record shows that the Employer provides complete hospital care. In providing these services, the hospital, as it appears from the record, employs 265 hourly paid employees. The laboratory is admin- istratively part of the pathology department which, in addition to the nine laboratory technicians involved herein, employs two EKG technicians, two clericals, and a laboratory aide. The department is headed by a pathologist under whom there is a supervisor who immediately supervises all department employees, including the laboratory technicians. Laboratory technicians perform various tests in- cluding blood, urine, body fluids, and body functions. They are provided with on the job training with no special education required. The technicians perform their duties not only in the laboratory but also in other parts of the hospital, including the recovery room, the operating room, central supply, X-ray department, and records department. They share the same benefits as other hourly paid employees such as other technicians, nurses, aides, clericals, and maintenance men. Upon the facts set forth above and the entire record in this case, we conclude that the unit of laboratory technicians sought herein is not composed of a distinct and homogeneous group of employees with interests separate from those of other employees, and hence is not an appropriate unit. Accordingly, as no question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, we shall dismiss the petition herein. ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 1 We reject the Petitioner's contention that a history of bargaining for the laboratory technicians has been established by the fact that they had banded together in a loose coalition to present their grievances to management. 186 NLRB No. 56