Opinion letter to the Honorable Joe D. Holt

Feb ruary 22 , 1971 Honorable Joe D. Holt Representative, District 102 Room 405, Capitol Building Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 Dear Representative Holt: Answer b y lett er - Wood OPINION LETTER NO. 4A F\LED ¥A You have asked tor our opinion on who is the proper "governing body" to adopt, modify or reject the written results or labor dis- cussions arising out or proposals tendered by Local 1810, American Federation ot State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, in behalf ot employees ot the Ellis Pischel State Cancer Hospital pur- suant to the Public Employee Labor Organization Law {Section 105.500, et seq., RSMo). The State Cancer Commission is charged by law with the respon- sibility tor making all rules and regulations tor the conduct and discipline or the State Cancer Hospital, selecting and appointing the general medical starr or the hospital, and appointing an ad- ministrator tor the hospital (Sections 200.020-200.0~0, RSMo). The administrator is in charge or the operation and conduct or the hos- pital and he is to employ nurses, attendants and other employees necessa.ry to the administration or the hospital (Sections 200.020 and 200.050, RSMo). The Cancer Commission has been assigned to the Division or Health in the Department or Public Health and Welfare (Section 192.010, RSMo). The State Board or Health has succeeded to all "statutory responsibilities of the Division or Health other than those ot an administrative nature" (Section 191.410, RSMo). The Department or Public Health and Welfare, established pursuant to constitutional mandate (Article IV, Section 37, Constitution or Missouri, 1945) is composed or the Divisions or Health, Welfare and Mental Health (Section 191.010, RSMo). The department is con- trolled and administered by the director ot the Department or Pub- lic Health and Welfare (Section 191.020, RSMo) . The director ot Honorable Joe D. Holt each or the three divisions within the department is, subject to the supervision or the director or the department, the chief ad- ministrative officer or his division, and each division director may appoint and discharge the employees or his division subject to the approval of the director of the department (Section 191.060, RSMo). Does the director of the Department of Public Health and Wel- fare or the director or the Division or Health have control and au- thority over the State Cancer Hospital? We think so. The law (Section 192.010, RSMo) assigning the Cancer Commission to the Divi- sion of Health in the Department of Public Health and Welfare is in apparent obedience to the constitutional direction that there shall be no more than sixteen departments within the executive branch of state government, to which all boards, bureaus, commissions and other agencies exercising administrative or executive authority shall be assigned (Article IV, Section 12, Constitution or Missouri, 1945). Por reasons set forth in our Opinion No. 57 or March 10, 1948, to Samuel Marsh (copy attached), we perceive a legislative inten- tion from the above statutes that the Cancer Commission and the ad- ministrator or the State Cancer Hospital shall be subject to the control and direction or the Department of Public Health and Wel- fare and the Division or Health in their operation of tho Cancer Hospital. While the director of the Department of Public Health and Wel- fare does have supervisory control over the divisions within the department, we believe he exercises such control in his discretion, and that in the absence of his exercising his right to take part in labor discussions and adopting, modifying or rejecting the written results or such discussions, the directors of the respective divi- sions properly participate in the labor alscuosions and properly adopy, modify or reject the written results . We believe the depart- ment director is a proper party and one who has a right to parti- cipate in labor discussions and subsequent understandings but that he is not a necessary party to the discussions and understandings. Any presently existing understandings adopted by the directors or the respective divisions are valid and subsisting understandings even though not adopted by the director of the Department of Public Health and Welfare. Of course , the director or the Dep~rtment or Public Health and Welfare may at any time specifically disapprove any understandings. Accordingly, it is our opinion that future labor proposals submitted pursuant to Sections 105.510 and 105.520, RSMo, in behalf of employees or the Ellis Pischel State Cancer Hospital -2- Honorable Joe D. Holt are properly presented to the director of the Division of Health for discussion and ultimate adoption, modification or reJection, and that past labor proposals presented to, and adopted by the director or the Division or Health are valid until expressly dis- approved by the director or the Department or Public Health and Welfare. Enclosure: Op. No. 57 3-10-48, Marsh Yours very truly, JOHN C. DANPORTH Attorney General -3-