National Labor Relations Board v. Hmo International/california Medical Group Health Plan, Inc.

This is an application to enforce an order of the NLRB requiring respondent HMO International [HMO] to cease and desist from unfair labor practices and to bargain with the California Medical Registered Nurses Association, United Nurses Association of California [UNAC]. UNAC represented a unit composed of all registered nurses at HMO’s many California facilities.

In this court, HMO’s response to the petition is that the bargaining unit was constituted too narrowly, contrary to the law applicable to health facilities. HMO argues that the unit should have included licensed vocational nurses [LVNs] in addition to registered nurses [RNs].

HMO employs about 90 RNs and 30 LVNs at 19 California facilities. The LVNs are within a bargaining unit that includes other clerical and technical job categories. The representative for this larger unit is the Service Employees International Union [SEIU]. The particular RNs and LVNs in question are similar in some respects and different in others; the former job category generally involves more education, prestige, responsibility, etc. than the latter, but neither the similarities nor the differences are compelling on their face. The record reveals…

dissenting:

We sit on a court of limited jurisdiction. The Constitution and laws have not empowered us to right every wrong we might perceive or imagine. That function is occasionally left in the hands of coordinate branches of our government. Such is the case here. As the majority correctly states, *815 judicial review is only appropriate when the NLRB has ignored a legal standard. The Board, however, has not done so in this case. Therefore, I dissent.

It is undeniable that the purpose of the 1974 amendment of section 2(2) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 152 (2), is to limit the number of bargaining units in nonprofit hospitals so that unnecessary disruption of health facilities can be prevented. Yet, as the legislative history of the 1974 amendment of section 2(2) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 152 (2), makes clear:

120 Cong.Rec. 22575 (1974).

Thus, the amendment was not meant to interfere with the deference courts have traditionally paid to the Board’s unit determination. Moreover, the amendment does not provide specific criteria the Board must follow in all circumstances. The majority argues that even if the amendment itself does not provide such criteria, NLRB v. St. Francis Hospital,…

678 F.2d 806 110 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2745 , 94 Lab.Cas. P 13,679 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. HMO INTERNATIONAL/CALIFORNIA MEDICAL GROUP HEALTH PLAN, INC., Respondent. No. 79-7083. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 7, 1980. Submission Ordered Vacated Oct. 21, 1980. Ordered Resubmitted Nov. 19, 1980. Decided June 2, 1982. Susan L. Dolin, Washington, D. C., argued, for petitioner; Elliott Moore, Washington, D. C., on brief. Stefan M. Mason, Munger, Tolles & Rickershauser, Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for respondent; Howard Knee, Beverly A. Stuart, Los Angeles, Cal., on brief. On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before WALLACE, KENNEDY and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. KENNEDY, Circuit Judge: 1 This is an application to enforce an order of the NLRB requiring respondent HMO International (HMO) to cease and desist from unfair labor practices and to bargain with the California Medical Registered Nurses Association, United Nurses Association of California (UNAC). UNAC represented a unit composed of all registered nurses at HMO's many California facilities. 2 In this court, HMO's response to…