Greenberg R B, Ross R S
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1977 May;34(5):541-4.
The implications for hospital pharmacists of recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rulings are discussed. The history of hospital coverage under federal labor laws is reviewed, including the removal of the exemption of nonprofit hospitals from the Taft-Hartley Act in 1974. Also discussed is the ruling of the NLRB in the case of Mercy Hospitals of Sacramento wherein appropriate bargaining units of hospital workers were defined. Finally, the question of exclusive bargaining units for hospital pharmacists, as addressed in NLRB rulings in the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and San Jose Hospital and Medical Center cases, is reviewed. Apparently, the NLRB did not rule in favor of exclusive hospital pharmacist units primarily because of an insufficient history of such units. Although there are inconsistencies in the NLRB's rulings in Mercy Hospitals and San Jose, it is unlikely that the policy expressed in these cases will be changed in the near future.
本文讨论了美国国家劳动关系委员会（NLRB）近期裁决对医院药剂师的影响。回顾了联邦劳动法下医院覆盖范围的历史，包括1974年非营利性医院不再享受《塔夫脱-哈特利法案》的豁免。还讨论了NLRB在萨克拉门托仁慈医院案中的裁决，该案确定了医院工作人员的适当谈判单位。最后，回顾了NLRB在凯撒基金会医院案以及圣何塞医院及医疗中心案中涉及的医院药剂师专属谈判单位问题。显然，NLRB未做出有利于医院药剂师专属单位的裁决，主要原因是此类单位的历史不足。尽管NLRB在仁慈医院案和圣何塞案中的裁决存在不一致之处，但近期内这些案例所表达的政策不太可能改变。
