Zimmerman D A, King G R
Health Prog. 1990 Jan-Feb;71(1):96-101.
In the healthcare industry today, unions and management must cope with a confused, contradictory, and often changeable body of law and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) policy when unions attempt to establish themselves at a particular institution. More than 15 years ago, Congress amended the National Labor Relations Act to grant labor unions the right to organize employees of not-for-profit hospitals and other healthcare organizations. An election to form a union cannot be held, however, until the NLRB determines which employee classifications constitute an "appropriate" collective bargaining unit. Since 1974, labor and management have fought over this basic question before Congress, the NLRB, and the federal courts. One paragraph of congressional instruction to the NLRB, which stipulates that the board prevent "proliferation of bargaining units in the health care industry," has over the years been construed in widely varying ways by the board and the courts. Management has argued that two units should be the maximum number allowed as appropriate whereas unions have argued for more. Last April the NLRB established a rule allowing for as many as eight bargaining units at a particular institution, but three months later a federal district court issued a permanent injunction against the rule. The board has appealed the injunction, and as both sides await a ruling, dozens of pending hospital union election cases have mounted up. Nor does a decision by a court of appeals promise to resolve the issue.
在当今的医疗行业中,当工会试图在某一特定机构组建自己时,工会和管理层必须应对一套混乱、矛盾且经常变化的法律以及美国国家劳动关系委员会(NLRB)的政策。15年多以前,国会修订了《国家劳动关系法》,赋予工会组织非营利性医院及其他医疗组织员工的权利。然而,在NLRB确定哪些员工类别构成一个“合适的”集体谈判单位之前,不能举行组建工会的选举。自1974年以来,劳资双方就在国会、NLRB以及联邦法院就这个基本问题展开了斗争。国会给NLRB的一段指示规定,该委员会应防止“医疗行业中谈判单位的激增”,多年来,该委员会和法院对这一规定的解释大相径庭。管理层认为,合适的谈判单位最多允许有两个,而工会则主张更多。去年4月,NLRB制定了一项规定,允许在某一特定机构设立多达8个谈判单位,但三个月后,一家联邦地方法院发布了一项针对该规定的永久禁令。该委员会已对该禁令提起上诉,在双方等待裁决之际,数十起悬而未决的医院工会选举案件不断增加。而且上诉法院的裁决也不一定能解决这个问题。