New York & Presbyterian Hospital v. National Labor Relations Board
649 F.3d 723
D.C. Cir.2011Background
- Hospital and Columbia University affiliation; NYSNA represents ~2600 Hospital nurses; dispute centered on non-Union nurse practitioners performing bargaining unit work; NYSNA sought information about NPs ( Hospital and Columbia NPs ) to arbitrate alleged side-letter violations; ALJ found Hospital violated 8(a)(1)/(5) and ordered broad information production; 2-member Board panel initially vacated; three-member Board later affirmed; case routed through multiple circuits under 10(e)/(f); petition for review in DC Circuit granted enforcement of Board's order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Relevance of requested information | NYSNA's request is relevant to alleged side-letter violation. | Hospital argues some requests concern non-bargaining-unit NPs and are irrelevant. | NYSNA's request for information about non-bargaining-unit NPs and Columbia NPs is relevant; burden on NYSNA to show relevance applies but threshold is low. |
| Scope of information about bargaining unit employees | Shifts worked by Hospital NPs are needed to police unit work. | Information about shifts for bargaining unit NPs was already largely provided. | Court affirms need to provide information on shifts for bargaining unit NPs. |
| Credibility of credentialing files as responsive data | Credentialing documents could contain duties and assignments relevant to NP work. | Credentialing files may not contain all requested data (shifts, status). | Credentialing files constitute responsive information; Hospital must produce what it possesses. |
| Board authority and procedural posture | Challenge to two-member Board panel's authority; deferral policy. | Board later acted with proper three-member quorum; issues reviewed under §160(e)/(f). | Board acted with valid quorum; issues procedurally preserved under 10(e)/(f) and §160(e). |
Key Cases Cited
- Oil, Chem. & Atomic Workers Local Union No. 6-418 v. NLRB, 711 F.2d 348 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (employer's duty to furnish information extends to data to administer and police a collective bargaining agreement)
- U.S. Testing Co. v. NLRB, 160 F.3d 14 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (presumption of relevance for unit employees; burden for outside-unit data)
- Acme Indus. Co., 385 U.S. 432 (U.S. 1967) (discovery-type standard for information relevance; potential relevance suffices)
- Detroit Edison Co. v. NLRB, 440 U.S. 301 (U.S. 1979) (duty to bargain includes providing information to union)
- Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 239 N.L.R.B. 106 (NLRB 1978) (supports broad approach to relevance and information requests)
- DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. NLRB, 288 F.3d 434 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (Board's deferral policy within agency discretion; not reversible here)
- Laurel Baye Healthcare of Lake Lanier, Inc. v. NLRB, 564 F.3d 469 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (two-member Board panel cannot validly exercise authority; impact on case)