- 29 -
nearly ten year bargaining history.  Nor are there any other compelling circumstances.(15) "Here 

there have been no recent significant changes in the Petitioners' operations.

         [Here] the Board is not called upon to make an initial unit determination.  Much water
         has passed under the bridge since the [parties' initial contract nearly ten] years ago.
         Relationships have evolved and been established since that time.  These relationships
         cannot now be ignored.... To hold that these employees d[o] not constitute an
         appropriate unit represented by [UE Local 404) would be to ignore 'the realities
         of the relationship between the parties.'

Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 214 NLRB 637, 643 (1974)(citations omitted).  The statutory

or compelling circumstances required simply are not present in the instant case and the Hearing

Officer should find a unit of both paid and unpaid staff the appropriate unit.

         Both paid and unpaid are Union officers and stewards, and participate in the grievance

process. (T., p. 58, LL. 9-11; T., p. 177 L. 18 -- p. 178 L. 17) Grievances are filed by the

Union on behalf of both paid and unpaid staff. (T., p. 233 L. 23 -- p. 235 L. 1). Moreover, the 

contract, the Letter of Understanding, and all extensions cover both paid and unpaid staff 

including producers' rights. (T., p. 236 L. 17 - p. 238 L. 9, Ex. J-1, Ex. J-2, Ex. U-3, Ex.

U-4) Under these circumstances, there is no justification for disturbing the composition

of the existing bargaining unit.

        B.     Degree of functional integration, common supervision, and centralization of

        15     The Employer will argue that unpaid staff are not employees under the Act, a
compelling circumstance requiring Board review.  The Employer is simply wrong.  As previously
argued, unpaid staff at WBAI are "employees" whether one looks at legislative history, U.S.
Supreme Court or recent Board law.


Previous Page ---------- Next Page
Up to the briefs page.