Palmetto Prince George Operating, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board
841 F.3d 211
| 4th Cir. | 2016Background
- Palmetto Prince George Operating, LLC runs a 24/7 nursing home; staff includes 6 RNs and 17 LPNs (the "Nurses") and 40 CNAs. Employer’s handbook lists Nurses above CNAs and calls them CNAs’ “first line of authority.”
- The Union sought to represent the Nurses; Palmetto argued the Nurses were supervisors and thus ineligible to unionize under 29 U.S.C. § 152(11).
- Parties stipulated the Nurses lacked 10 of the 12 statutory supervisory functions; dispute focused on whether Nurses (1) discipline CNAs and (2) responsibly direct CNAs in a manner requiring "independent judgment."
- The Board and Regional Director found Nurses were not supervisors, held an election, the Nurses voted for the Union, and the employer refused to bargain; the Board found unfair labor practices and ordered Palmetto to bargain.
- The Fourth Circuit reviews the Board’s factual findings for substantial evidence and applied the Board’s post-Kentucky River interpretation of "independent judgment" (as articulated in Oakwood).
- The court concluded Palmetto failed to show Nurses exercised independent judgment when disciplining or directing CNAs given detailed employer policies, manager on-call availability, and scant evidence of nurses making final disciplinary decisions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Palmetto) | Defendant's Argument (Board/Union) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nurses exercise independent judgment in disciplining CNAs | Nurses make disciplinary decisions (e.g., sent CNA home for sleeping) and thus exercise independent judgment | Nurses only report violations; final investigations and discipline are made by Managers; policies dictate outcomes | Nurses do not exercise independent judgment when disciplining; employer failed to meet burden |
| Whether Nurses "responsibly direct" CNAs using independent judgment | Nurses supervise CNAs, are often most senior on site, and ensure CNAs follow protocols | Nurses enforce detailed written policies, receive specific training/instructions, and managers are on-call; discretion is heavily constrained | Nurses do not exercise independent judgment in directing CNAs; employer failed to meet burden |
Key Cases Cited
- NLRB v. Kentucky River Cmty. Care, Inc., 532 U.S. 706 (2001) (articulates three-prong test for statutory supervisors and defers to NLRB on scope of "independent judgment")
- Beverly Enterprises, Virginia, Inc. v. NLRB, 165 F.3d 290 (4th Cir. 1999) (pre-Kentucky River decision finding nurses were supervisors under broader standards)
- Glenmark Assoc., Inc. v. NLRB, 147 F.3d 333 (4th Cir. 1998) (pre-Oakwood decision treating nurse discretion as probative of supervisory status)
- Pac Tell Group, Inc. v. NLRB, 817 F.3d 86 (4th Cir. 2016) (clarifies employer’s burden and standard of proof in supervisory-status disputes)
- NLRB v. Health Care & Retirement Corp. of America, 511 U.S. 571 (1994) (discusses legislative history and scope of § 152(11))
- St. Mary’s Home, Inc. v. NLRB, 690 F.2d 1062 (4th Cir. 1982) (pre-Kentucky River nurse-supervisor treatment)
- Nat’l Cable & Telecomm. Ass’n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967 (2005) (agency interpretation can supersede prior judicial constructions of ambiguous statutes)