Newton-Wellesley Hospital

NEWTON-WELLESLEY HOSPITAL 699 Newton-Wellesley Hospital and Massachusetts Nurs- es Association, Petitioner. Case i-RC-13610 July 30, 1975 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS FANNING AND PENELLO Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Irwin P. Weiner of the National Labor Relations Board. Fol- lowing the hearing, the Regional Director for Region 1 transferred this case to the Board for decision. Thereafter, the Employer and the Petitioner filed briefs with the Board. 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,2 the Board finds: 1. The Employer, a private nonprofit hospital in Newton Lower Falls, Massachusetts, is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to rep- resent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A 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. 4. Newton-Wellesley Hospital is divided into four major divisions: nursing services, school of nursing, fiscal services, and an administrative division which incorporates 27 various departments within the hos- pital. Of the approximately 386 registered nurses (hereinafter referred to as RN's) at the hospital, 334 are employed in the nursing services division. Of the remaining 52, about 23 are employed in the school of i We find no merit in the Employer's exceptions to a ruling by the Hear- ing Officer which resulted in excluding certain testimony the Employer sought to elicit from the director of nursing services concerning the supervi- sory status of head nurses. The Hearing Officer based his ruling on the ground, supported by the record, that such evidence had already been cov- ered by that witness. In any event, the ruling does not prejudice the Employ- er as the status of head nurses was amply litigated. 2 The Employer has moved to reopen the record and has requested the Board to receive certain documentary exhibits into evidence . The Employer asserts, and the record clearly reveals, that all parties dealt with such docu- ments as having been admitted into evidence . We therefore grant the Employer's motion to reopen the record for the limited purpose of receiving the aforementioned exhibits, Employer 's Exhs. 56, 57, and 58, into evidence. nursing and 29 are employed in various departments located within other divisions of the hospital. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all RN's employed by the Employer, including those RN's who comprise the faculty at the hospital's school of nursing, but excluding all other employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. As a threshold matter, the Employer contends that a unit confined to RN's is too narrow in scope and argues that only a unit consisting of all the professional employees employed at the hospital for patient health care other than physicians may properly be established.' The Employer agreed, however, that, should the Board determine that a unit limited to RN's is appropriate, such a unit should include the RN's who are em- ployed in the hospital's school of nursing. We find no merit in the Employer's opposition to the establishment of a unit confined to RN's. As we indicated in the recently decided Mercy Hospitals of Sacramento, Inc., 217 NLRB No. 131 (1975), we be- lieve that registered nurses have a sufficient commu- nity of interest separate and apart from all other pro- fessionals to warrant finding that, "if they are so sought and they so desire, [they] are entitled to be represented in a separate bargaining unit." Id. The Employer claims, that, in any event, certain of the RN's, below identified, should properly be ex- cluded from the unit found appropriate. It would de- scribe some of the disputed employees as either su- pervisors or managerial employees, some as clericals, and others as casual employees.4 They are located in various divisions of the hospital and the school of nursing. For purposes of discussion, we shall divide the employees in dispute in accord with the divisions where they are assigned, viz the nursing services divi- sion, the administrative division, and the school of nursing. A. Nursing Services Division The Employer would exclude as supervisors those individuals occupying positions in the following clas- sifications within the nursing services division: super- visors, nurse leaders, assistant supervisors, head nurs- es, assistant head nurses, and senior staff nurses. We dispose of the question concerning the status of these individuals in accordance with the principle that the 3 The parties stipulated that registered nurses are professional employees. 4 The parties agreed that certain categones of employees should be in- cluded in the unit. Thus, the parties stipulated that RN's who are classified as "staff nurses" in the division of nursing services and RN's who are in- structors and assistant instructors in the school of nursing should be in whatever unit the Board finds appropriate . The parties also agreed that certain other individuals should be excluded from the unit as supervisors. They are the director and the assistant director of the division of nursing services, the director and the assistant director of the school of nursing; the chief radiologic technologist ; and the medical records transcriber 219 NLRB No. 80 700 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD test for determining whether a health care profes- sional is a supervisor is whether that individual, who may give direction to other employees in the exercise of professional judgment which is incidental to the professional's treatment of patients , also exercises su- pervisory authority in the interest of the employer.5 As a preliminary matter, we note that the hospital is staffed three shifts per day 7 days a week, and that the nursing services division is under the overall su- pervision and direction of the director and the assis- tant director of nursing services. There are approxi- mately 324 RN's within the nursing services division, 7 of whom are classified as supervisors, 4 as nurse leaders, and 9 as assistant supervisors. Supervisors and nurse leaders have the same duties and perform the same functions in the same man- ner-and indeed the Employer uses their titles inter- changeably in referring to them in the record. All of them are rated grade 5 in the professional wage schedule,6 the highest of the grades ; all of them re- port directly to the director or the assistant director of the nursing services division ; and all of them at- tend the semimonthly meetings the Employer holds for its supervisory personnel. All but two of these RN's are employed on the day shift, one of the two others is employed on the evening shift, and the other on the night shift. Each of those on the day shift heads one of the various patient care units the hospi- tal maintains, viz ambulatory care, operating and re- covery room, mental health, intensive care, maternal and child health unit, and two medical-surgical units. Each such unit-other than the recovery room-is regularly staffed with a head nurse, a senior staff nurse, staff nurses, licensed practical nurses (LPN's), aides, orderlies, and ward clerks. The supervisor on the evening shift and the supervisor on the night shift have charge of all these units on their respective shifts, and are frequently the only individuals ap- pearing to possess any supervisory attributes in the nursing services division who are physically present, as a regular matter, during their respective shifts. Supervisors or nurse leaders on the day shift are directly responsible for the direction of the work ac- tivities of the employees assigned to the respective unit which each heads. In performing these responsi- bilities, they make the kind of decisions reflecting the "exercise of professional judgment" not only affect- ing the care of patients but also affecting the employ- ment conditions of the employees involved and 3 Wing Memorial Hospital, 217 NLRB No. 172 (1975). Cf. S. Rept. 93- 766, 93d Cong. 2d Sess. 6 (April 2, 1974) 6 The starting pay for grade 5 is $5.88 per hour and reaches a maximum of $7.49 per hour. Staff nurses who are at grade I of the professional wage scale receive a starting pay of $4.72 per hour and reach a maximum of $5.92 per hour. which are therefore of a type properly to be de- scribed as reflecting the exercise of supervisory au- thority within the meaning of the Act. Thus, each has authority to direct or approve overtime work, to re- vise work schedules, to transfer nursing or other per- sonnel either on a temporary ("floating") basis with- in departments or on a permanent basis from one departmental unit to another, to evaluate the perfor- mance of the employees involved, and to effectively recommend action with respect to the hiring and the discharge of employees. We find, accordingly, that supervisors and nurse leaders are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and we shall therefore exclude them from the unit. Assistant supervisors who are employed on the night and evening shifts have responsibilities compa- rable to those of supervisors on the day shift. As not- ed, there is only one supervisor on hand on each of these shifts, and the overall responsibility of each ex- tends to all of the patient care units. Accordingly, each such supervisor relies heavily on assistant super- visors to direct the employees performing the essen- tial patient care duties, as assigned. Each such assis- tant supervisor possesses and exercises authority to issue reprimands, and to relieve nursing and other personnel from duty as a disciplinary measure or for other reasons of choice. Each may and does make changes in staff assignments where such course is deemed necessary. Each may and does make recom- mendations with respect to the permanent transfer of RN's from one unit to another, and when she has done so the recommendation has been followed. Each is expected to and does in fact customarily as- sist the supervisor on her shift in the preparation of the formal evaluation of the employees whose work they direct, and such evaluations play an important role in the implementation of promotions and/or re- lated personnel policies which can affect the pay and status of employees. We find from the foregoing facts that the assistant supervisors on the evening and night shifts, like the supervisors, responsibly direct nursing and other per- sonnel on their respective shifts and possess such in- dicia of supervision as taking disciplinary action and making assignments, transfers, and evaluations. Ac- cordingly, we conclude that the six evening and night assistant supervisors are supervisors within the mean- ing of the Act and we shall, therefore, exclude them from the unit.' There is one RN on the day shift who, although classified as an assistant supervisor (Jean Rubinstein) 7 We note also that if the assistant supervisors on evening and night shifts are not considered to be supervisors within the meaning of the Act there would be only one statutory supervisor for approximately 167 and 81 nurs- ing and nonnursing personnel on the evening and night shifts, respectively. NEWTON-WELLESLEY HOSPITAL 701 may or may not possess supervisory status. She is part of the professional nursing staff assigned to the operating room and works there together with a su- pervisor, a head nurse, and 9 or 10 staff nurses. Ru- binstein occasionally functions as a scrub nurse, manages the flow of work in the operating room, and assigns lunch and other breaks to the staff. Although Rubinstein gives some direction to other nursing per- sonnel "in the exercise of professional judgment," and makes personnel assignments for lunch and breaks, its appears that team leaders, i.e., staff nurses who are assigned to lead a team of nurses, also make such assignments. Although Rubinstein substitutes for the supervisor of the operating room and re- covery room, there is no evidence as to how often such substitution occurs. Because of the lack of de- finitive evidence upon which to make a finding as to her alleged supervisory status we shall allow her to vote in the election subject to challenge. Head nurses: The division of nursing services em- ploys 18 head nurses, all of whom are employed on the day shift and all of whom are grade 3 of the professional wage scale .8 They work in the depart- mental units within the nursing services division un- der either a supervisor or a nurse leader. They are immediately responsible for seeing to it that the teams of hospital personnel assigned the tasks of car- ing for the patients within their units deliver all of the nursing and prescribed health care services the pa- tients need. In accord with hospital routine each such team is composed of RN's, LPN's, aides, and orderlies, and each departmental unit has at least one team. The head nurse designates the particular individuals who will form a team, and in most instances also assigns one of the RN's to serve as team leader for I day. In some instances , however, departmental unit team leaders are selected under a rotation scheme. Under this scheme, the RN who is team leader for the day designates which RN's will administer to particular patients. In performing their responsibilities, head nurses instruct staff nurses and other members of the teams about the performance of their tasks and about pa- tient care procedures. They also work along with the staff nurses until they are certain that the latter un- derstand and are following the prescribed proce- dures. They transmit and clarify doctors' orders and insure that they are followed; they "trouble shoot" for problems which staff nurses perceive in patient care; they recommend additional training for RN's and the acquisition of additional equipment to im- prove patient care in their units; they make rounds to evaluate patient care and to insure its proper delivery by staff nurses ; and they also perform direct patient care tasks as needed.9 They do not attend the semimonthly meetings held for supervisors, nurse leaders, and assistant supervi- sors; however, along with assistant head nurses, se- nior staff nurses, the supervisor of central supply ser- vice, and the head nurse of parenteral therapy, they attend meetings with the director of nursing services. The record reveals that the typical topics of conver- sation at these latter meetings concern the medica- tion system and the proper functioning of the laun- dry system. These meetings are chaired by a head nurse who is chosen for a 1-year term by her peers. (The meetings attended by the supervisors, nurse leaders, and assistant supervisor, on the other hand, are chaired by the director of nursing services.) The record further reveals that the topic of one of the supervisors' meetings was "the supervisors' role in collective-bargaining" in which the implications of the 1974 National Labor Relations Act amendments were discussed. There is no comparable evidence that such topic was ever discussed at the meetings attend- ed by the head nurses. Unlike the supervisors and nurse leaders, to whom the head nurses report, the head nurses have no au- thority to hire or discharge any employee or to effec- tively recommend any such action. Nor are they au- thorized to revise work schedules, approve overtime, or transfer employees between departmental units. Although they are called upon by supervisors to eval- uate the performance of employees assigned to their units and sign evaluation sheets together with the su- pervisors, the record shows that supervisors do not rely solely on the opinion of head nurses in evaluat- ing the potential of employees for promotion or re- tention, but seek information from a variety of per- sonnel. Head nurses do not discipline employees beyond the stage of verbal reprimand, and may re- lieve an RN from duty only when the RN is suspect- ed of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol i.e., conditions which would endanger the care of the patient. Both such actions may be taken by those RN's who are classified as charge nurses and who are conceded by the parties to be nonsupervisors. The foregoing facts viewed as a whole reveal that the duties and authority of head nurses in assigning employees to team leader positions are principally the product of highly professional skills and do not, without more, constitute an exercise of supervisory authority in the interest of the Employer. In these circumstances, head nurses are essentially "resource 9 Three of the four head nurses who testified in this proceeding testified without contradiction that they spend between 70 and 90 percent of their Grade 3 starts at $5.21 per hour and has a maximum of $6.49 per hour time in direct patient care. 702 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD persons" who are looked to by the other RN's and nonnursing personnel for advice and counsel in the care of patients. Accordingly, we find that the head nurses are not supervisors as defined in the Act and we shall include them in the unit. Senior staff nurses/assistant head nurses: There are 10 RN's classified as senior staff nurses , and 3 as assistant head nurses . Both classifications are grade 2 of the professional wage scale . 1° Both assistant head nurses and senior staff nurses who work in units where team nursing is utilized may function as team leaders on some days and as members of a team on others. They regularly replace head nurses in their respective units and perform their functions , and the Employer claims therefore that they also should be found to be supervisors . Thus, our determination of their status turns on our resolution of the Employer's basic contention as to the supervisory status of the head nurses they replace . As we have rejected the contention that head nurses are supervisors , it fol- lows, and we find, that senior staff nurses and assis- tant head nurses are not supervisors within the mean- ing of the Act. We shall therefore include them in the unit." Coordinator of continuing care: The coordinator of continuing care is a position occupied at the time of the hearing by Marion Kearn , a registered nurse. The Employer contends she is either a supervisory or managerial employee . In support of this position it adduced evidence that her main function is to "inte- grate the practices and principles of Community Health Nursing into the hospital setting to enhance the discharge planning process and provide optimal continuity of patient care." To that end the incum- bent is responsible for helping to formulate and carry out hospital policy respecting the assignment of pa- tients to levels of care and the evaluation of outside facilities for continuing care of hospital patients. She reports directly to the director of nursing services and is listed at grade 5 on the hospital's professional wage scale. She attends management staff meetings with the director of nursing services, occupies a semi- private office in the main nursing office, and shares the director's secretary. She consults with nurses and physicians concerning the kinds and quality of facili- ties that are available to patients who are about to be discharged and she spends considerable time in edu- cating the hospital staff to inform them of a patient's postdischarge needs. She visits nursing homes and 10 The minimum wage for grade 2 is $4.94 per hour and has a maximum of $6.13 per hour. 11 If we were to find that head nurses , assistant head nurses , and senior staff nurses are in fact supervisors, it would result in a ratio of I supervisor to 2.5 (professional) employees on the day shift . Because we find that head nurses, assistant head nurses, and senior staff nurses are not supervisors, the resulting supervisor to (professional ) employee ratio is I to 9.6. extended care facilities to assess the level of care they provide and makes recommendations to the hospital as to whether such facilities are appropriate for the hospital's patients. Kearn had no subordinates at the time of the hear- ing but there was undisputed evidence that at least one additional position had been budgeted for the continuing care department for the coming year; and the job description for the continuing care coordina- tor position lists among the duties of its occupant the supervision of department members. On the evidence before us, we cannot conclusively determine whether the coordinator of continuing care is a supervisor or a managerial" employee. We shall, therefore, permit her to vote in the election subject to challenge. Staff education coordinator: The hospital maintains an in-service and continuing education program op- erated by an RN designated as the staff education coordinator and two other RN's known as in-service instructors. The Employer would exclude the staff education coordinator as a supervisor. We find no persuasive evidence of supervisory authority over other RN's. Thus, although there was testimony that the staff education coordinator evaluates nurses dur- ing their probationary period for purposes of reten- tion and transmits her recommendations to the direc- tor or to the assistant director of nursing services, the two in-service instructors who the parties agreed should be included in the unit also submit evalua- tions, and the director and the assistant director ap- parently seek out the opinions of other individuals who have come in contact with a new nurse's perfor- mance. There was evidence that the staff education coor- dinator hires and fires aides and orderlies. But the record does not indicate whether her activities in this regard consume more than 50 percent of her time." With respect to her alleged managerial status, the re- cord shows that the staff education coordinator is responsible for developing and organizing new edu- cation programs for nursing personnel. But we can- not tell from the record before us whether her activi- ty in this respect is the kind which would confer supervisory or managerial status under established definitions . Because we cannot determine from the current state of the record whether she is a supervisor and/or a managerial employee, we shall permit the 12 The Board defines managerial employees as those who formulate and effectuate management policies by expressing and making operative the decisions of their employer, and those who have discretion in the perfor- mance of theirjobs independent of their employer's established policy Gen- eral Dynamics Corporation, Convair Aerospace Division, San Diego Opera- tions, 213 NLRB 851, and cases cited therein at In. 20 (1974). 13 Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 163 NLRB 723, 726-727 (1967); Adelpht University, 195 NLRB 639, 644 (1972); Automobile Club of Missouri, 209 NLRB 614 (1974) NEWTON-WELLESLEY HOSPITAL staff education coordinator to vote in the election subject to challenge. On-call nurses: The hospital employs approximate- ly 29 "on-call" nurses, all of whom the Employer would exclude as casual employees but whom Peti- tioner would include as regular part-time employees. They are all registered nurses who have indicated that they are available for work at certain specified times and are willing to be called by the hospital whenever extra help is needed. Other than the fact that on-call nurses do not work pursuant to a prear- ranged schedule, work less hours and less regularly than full-time staff nurses, and do not share in the Employer's fringe benefit program,14 there are no dif- ferences between them and their full-time counter- parts. They work throughout all of the various hospi- tal units within the division of nursing services and perform the same functions, in the same manner, and under the same working conditions and supervision as the other staff nurses . Furthermore, the payroll record submitted for the period June 1 to September 1, 1974, shows that a substantial number of the on- call nurses worked regularly during most of the pay periods occurring within that timespan and some of them appeared to have worked for longer periods of time and on a more frequent basis therein than the "part-time permanent" nurses whom the parties agreed to include in the unit." The few differences existing between on-call and full-time nurses, as discussed above, have been found by the Board to be insufficient to warrant the unit exclusion of part-time employees who would other- wise qualify for inclusion in the unit.16 As it appears that the on-call nurses work on a regular, though un- scheduled, basis covering most pay periods during the year and perform the same tasks, in the same areas as the RN's who are included in the unit, thus sharing a strong community of interest with them, we find they are regular part-time registered nurses and shall include them in the unit herein found appropri- ate.17 With respect to the eligibility of the on-call nurses to vote in the election we note that, in a prior repre- sentation proceeding before the Massachusetts La- bor Commission, the parties agreed to permit on-call nurses to vote if they had worked 30 or more hours in 14 Part-time limited nurses, i.e., RN's who work less than 20 hours per week, whom the parties agreed to include in the unit, also do not receive any fringe benefits. we Part-time permanent nurses are defined by the Employer to be those RN's who work in excess of 20 hours per week . Like full-time RN's they receive certain fringe benefits. 16 Anne Arundel General Hospital, Inc., 217 NLRB No. 148 (1975); Quigley Industries, Inc., 180 NLRB 486 (1969); Scoa, Inc., 140 NLRB 1379 (1963). 17 Anne Arundel General Hospital, Inc., supra There is evidence that one of the on-call nurses functions solely as an admitting officer when called for duty. For the reasons given infra, we shall exclude her from the unit. 703 the 11-week period between January 1, 1972, to March 18, 1972. We find that this formula does not conflict with the Board's treatment of eligibility for- mulae for on-call employees." Such formula has the added virtue of representing the prior agreement of the parties, and we see no reason why this formula should not be applied in the instant proceeding. Therefore, we shall direct that those on-call nurses who have worked a minimum of 30 hours in the I1- week period immediately preceding the date of is- suance of this Decision and Direction of Election shall be eligible to vote.19 B. Division of Administration Head nurse of parenteral therapy: Jane Rawlings is the current head nurse of parenteral therapy, a hospi- tal service assigned to the pathology department. Rawlings is in charge of 18 staff nurses assigned to parenteral therapy to provide services to patients throughout the hospital on a 24-hour-per-day basis. The services involve giving patients intravenous solu- tions or blood transfusions, or drawing their blood. As head nurse, Rawlings is responsible for insuring that patient needs of the nursing services division above described are properly and adequately covered and filled on a 24-hour basis. As part of her day-to-day performance of her re- sponsibilities Rawlings makes up the work schedules (including vacation schedules) of RN's on a 6-month rotating basis, and revises the schedules as necessary to satisfy the needs of the department. She has the authority to determine whether overtime should be worked and which nurse should work it, and to pass on employee requests for time off. Rawlings also conducts initial interviews with applicants who seek work in her department, advises and makes a recom- mendation to the chief pathologist on the applicant's suitability, and the latter then interviews the appli- cant in Rawling's presence and makes the hiring de- cision . In so doing, the chief pathologist invariably has acted in accord with Rawling's recommenda- tions. We find on the foregoing facts that, unlike the other head nurses described supra, the head nurse of parenteral therapy possesses and exercises superviso- ry authority within the meaning of the Act with re- spect to the RN's in her charge. We shall therefore exclude the head nurse of parenteral therapy from the unit. Supervisor of central supply service: The hospital employs a supervisor of central supply service, a po- 18 Jai Transportation Corp, 128 NLRB 780 (1960); Checker Cab Company, 141 NLRB 583 (1963); Fresno Auto Auction, Inc, 167 NLRB 878 (1967). 19 Cf. Anne Arundel General Hospital, Inc, supra, and cases cited therein at fn. 4. 704 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sition occupied at the time of the hearing by Barbara Allen. There are approximately 32 individuals, most of whom are aides, employed in central supply ser- vice. None of these individuals is a registered nurse. Allen's assistant supervisor, who directs the unit when Allen is not present, also is not a registered nurse. Although Allen wears a nurse's uniform, she is not required to do so. According to the Employer there is no requirement that the supervisor of central supply service be a registered nurse. The record re- veals, however, that when the position was classified within the division of nursing services one of the re- quirements included in the position description was that the occupant be a graduate of a school of nurs- ing and be a member of the American Nurses Asso- ciation. Since the position has been classified within the hospital's administration division, the occupant has always been a registered nurse. Nonetheless, central supply is organizationally separate and apart from the nursing services division. Allen has an office of her own in the central core of the central supply area. She is in grade 5 of the hospital's professional wage scale, the highest labor grade on the hospital's pay schedule. Allen is a mem- ber of the infection control committee, the nursing practices committee, the products committee, and the head nurses committee, all of which are com- posed of RN's. Allen has a substantial knowledge of sterilization techniques and the kinds of equipment and supplies used by RN's in the care of patients. Thus, because of her knowledge of nursing tech- niques and her close daily contact with other RN's it appears that the supervisor of central supply service is performing, inter alia, certain nursing functions. The record, however, presents contradictory evi- dence as to her alleged supervisory and/or manageri- al status. For example, although she supervises cer- tain nonnursing personnel there is no evidence as to what percentage of her time is spent in this activity and the fact that she makes effective reports for the purchasing of new equipment does not without more confer upon her the status of a managerial employee. We shall, therefore, permit the supervisor of central supply service to vote in the election subject to chal- lenge. Admitting officers: The hospital employes five admtting officers, including the chief admitting offi- cer and one on-call admitting officer. Although all the admitting officers now employed are RN's,20 they provide no direct patient care, perform no related professional duties, and have no day-to-day- work contacts with RN's or other patient care personnel. 20 The hospital also employs approximately nine admitting clerks, none of whom are RN's They obtain data from patients in accordance with preestablished forms, make room assignments, and in general see to it that patients are properly admit- ted to and discharged from the hospital. The hospital does not require that its admitting officers be RN's, and places them for pay purposes on the nonprofes- sional wage scale. We find, in accord with the Employer's contention, that the admitting officers perform clerical rather than professional functions. We shall therefore exclude them from the profession- al unit sought herein.21 C. The School of Nursing Chairmen in Nursing Education: The school of nursing employs four chairmen in nursing education, all of whom are RN's. One is the chairman of first year nursing, while the other three are all chairmen of various departments within second year nursing (sometimes referred to as Level II Nursing). All of the faculty, including the chairmen, meet as a group in each department and resolve by consensus questions concerning scheduling, course outline, and assignments of the individual instructors. The course content is developed by the department chairman in cooperation with the faculty in her department. The chairmen are allowed to make "minor" changes in course content but only in collaboration with the de- partment members. "Major" changes in course con- tent must be approved by the curriculum committee composed of the chairmen, the coordinator of the second year (see infra ), and the assistant director and the director of the school. Final approval for major changes must be given by the faculty council which includes all full-time, faculty. Prospective in- structors must be interviewed by the director or her designated representative, usually the assistant direc- tor. After an interview with the director or her dele- gate the applicant is sent to the chairman of the de- partment in which she will serve or to other faculty members in that department whose recommenda- tions are considered. Under the school's guidelines, promotions depend on preparation and experience, professional mem- bership and activities, and formal or informal evalua- tions by other faculty members and/or students; they are subject to the approval of the director and the assistant director. The faculty as a whole devel- ops guidelines and objectives for faculty evaluations. The faculty member being evaluated writes an evalu- ation of herself, and her chairman writes another. Additional evaluations may be obtained from stu- dents and other faculty members. The main function s' Admitting officers are at grade 13 of the nonprofessional wage scale. That grade starts at $3.41 per hour and has a maximum pf $4.82 per hour. NEWTON-WELLESLEY HOSPITAL 705 of such evaluations is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each faculty member. Final authority for approving a pay raise rests with the director. The chairmen of the various departments do not reprimand faculty members, rather, they counsel, i.e., suggest or discuss, various ideas with the faculty in their respective departments. The director has final authority concerning the discharge of faculty mem- bers. Like faculty members, chairmen engage in the teaching of courses within their respective depart- ments. Chairmen are required to have a higher level of education and a greater level of experience than instructors. Chairmen receive higher pay than in- structors and assistant instructors. 2 Based on the foregoing it is apparent that decisions as to the appointment, promotion, and retention of faculty members are not made by the chairmen but by the director and assistant director. To the extent that the chairmen's recommendations concerning these matters are given weight and perhaps more weight than those of the faculty members and stu- dents, this appears to reflect the chairmen's superior knowledge and experience and does not indicate pos- session of the type of authority contemplated in the statutory definition of supervisor. The chairmen do not direct the work of faculty members; nor do they prepare the budget for the school or their depart- ments. Their authority with regard to course content is clearly a collegial one; i.e., whatever authority the chairmen possess is shared with other faculty mem- bers and with the director and the assistant director of the school. The record does not indicate that chairmen may make final selections for hiring, or have the authority to discharge or effectively recom- mend discharge or pay raises. We therefore conclude that department chairmen are not supervisors within the meaning of the Act.23 We further find they are not managerial employees for, as is evidenced by their lack of control over budgetary and personnel policies, they do not possess any executive-type au- thority to formulate and effectuate management poli- cies. We shall therefore include the department chairmen in the unit. Coordinator of the second year: The position of the coordinator of the second year, a position occupied at the time of the hearing by Shirley Knowland, is responsbile for coordinating all courses given during the second year of the school's 2-year program so as 22 Instructors are at grade 5 and assistant instructors are at grade 4 of the hospital's professional wage scale . Chairmen who are also at grade 5 are, however, at a higher "step" so that they receive approximately $7 to $25 more per week than instructors. 23 Fordham University, 214 NLRB No. 137 (1974); University of Miami, 213 NLRB 634 (1974); Fairleigh-Dickinson University, 205 NLRB 673 (1973); Rosary Hill College, 202 NLRB 1137 (1973). to achieve the educational objectives of the school. To that end Knowland meets with the three chair- men of second year nursing, identified supra, at least once a week either individually or on a group basis to discuss student problems, curriculum changes, and scheduling problems. There is no evidence that the coordinator of the second year hires or fires employees or disciplines them. There is some evidence that she submits rec- ommendations concerning the hiring of applicants for employment, submits annual evaluations of per- formance of the second year chairmen to the director or to the assistant director of the school, and substi- tutes for the latter individuals when they are both away from the school. Indeed, she is then in charge of the school. The record reveals that she evaluates the department secretary-who performs work for all second year faculty members-and assigns work to her. She also deals with outside agencies and recom- mends the commitment of certain funds for the school's use. The record does not clearly reveal the purpose or the use made of the evaluations which the coordina- tor of the second year submits to the director and the assistant director of the school. Although she submits recommendations concerning the hiring of instruc- tors, so do those faculty members who have inter- viewed applicants for employment; and it appears the director and the assistant director give all such recommendations filed with them the same weight in their determinations as to an applicant's suitability for employment. There is no evidence that the coor- dinator of the second year exercises any statutory authority over the department secretary and the fact that a professional employee may have a secretary does not necessarily constitute her a supervisor.24 Nor does the record show the extent of her authority to disburse school funds. On the other hand, we note that Knowland substitutes for the director and the assistant director whenever they are both absent. We cannot close our eyes to the fact that Knowland, af- ter the director and the assistant director, appears to be the ranking person within the school of nursing hierarchy. Nevertheless, the record evidence will not permit us to determine whether she is a supervisor and/or a managerial employee. We shall therefore permit her to vote subject to challenge. Admissions and financial aid coordinator: The coor- dinator of admissions and financial aid, a position occupied at the time of the hearing by Kathleen De- lany, is responsible for the recruitment and admis- sions activities of the school and for the administra- tion of the financial aid fund distributed to 24 Fordham University, 193 NLRB 134, 138 (7971). 706 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD students?5 Although Delany is a registered nurse, that professional qualification is not a condition of hire for the position she occupies but is only a prefer- ential attribute sought in the applicant. Delany is re- sponsible for knowing the sources of available funds for financial aid made available to students, collect- ing loan repayments from students, and handling ad- missions and transfers of students . She is not en- gaged to any degree either in patient care, as the staff nurses are, or in the training of nursing students, as the instructors and assistant instructors are. It is plain, therefore, and we find, that she is not perform- ing any professional nursing work, but rather is en- gaged in purely administrative functions for the stu- dents' benefit. We conclude, accordingly, that she lacks a community of interest with other members of the unit sought herein. We shall therefore exclude her from the RN professional unit.26 25 In 1973 that fund amounted to $60,000. 26 In so finding we need not reach nor pass upon the Employer' s alterna- tive contentions that Delany is a supervisor and/or a managerial employee Conclusion Upon the entire record and for the aforementioned reasons we find the following unit to be appropriate for the purposes of collective-bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All full-time and regular part-time registered nurses employed by Newton-Wellesley Hospital in its hospital and school of nursing including staff nurses, head nurses, assistant head nurses, senior staff nurses, instructors, assistant instruc- tors, and the chairmen in nursing education, but excluding the director and the assistant director of the nursing services division, the director and the assistant director of the school of nursing, the chief radiologic technologist, the medical records transcriber, admitting officers, supervi- sors, nurse leaders, assistant supervisors (on the evening and night shifts), the coordinator of ad- missions and financial aid, managerial employ- ees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act, and all other employees. [Direction of Election and Excelsior footnote omit- ted from publication.]