- 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.