Carroll Manor Nursing Home

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 2, 1973

202 N.L.R.B. 67 (N.L.R.B. 1973)

CARROLL MANOR NURSING HOME 67
Carroll Manor Nursing Home and Service Employees
International Union, Local 82 AFL-CIO, Petition-
er. Case 5-RC-8165
March 2, 1973
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND PENELLO
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before William I. Schooer, Hearing
Officer of the National Labor Relations Board.
Following the hearing and pursuant to Section
102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations and Statements of Procedure, Series
8, as amended, the case was transferred to the Board
for decision. A brief was filed by the Employer.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case,' the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is owned and operated by the
Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, a
religious, nonprofit New York corporation of about
400 members with its headquarters in Germantown,
New York. Its principal function is providing nursing
care for aged and infirm persons. The Carmelite
Order maintains and operates institutions in various
States as well as Scotland and Ireland, but only the
above home located in Hyattsville, Maryland, is
involved in the instant proceeding. At its Hyattsville
location, the Employer is licensed for nursing care by
the State of Maryland to operate a 226-bed home
treating four classes of residents: skilled care,
domiciliary care, intermediate (long term) nursing
care, and intermediate (short term) nursing care.
Each patient has his or her individual physician and
the only medical attendants on the staff are the
registered nurses. In accordance with a health
department regulation, the Employer has a "princi-
pal physician" who can be called on if a patient's
individual physician is unavailable in an emergency.
The Employer is a self-supporting institution which
derived revenues in 1971 in the amount of approxi-
mately $1,040,000. Almost all moneys allocated to
salaries, payment on the mortgage, payment to
vendors, and upkeep are derived from payments
received from patients. It does not receive any funds
from the Order or from any charitable organization,
although approximately $597,000 is owed on a
mortgage held by the Archdiocese of Washington,
D.C., as well as $40,000 owed to the Archdiocese for
a loan. Other than payments to the Employer by
residents, which constitute 95 to 98 percent of the
annual gross income, the only other source of income
is a small amount in bequests. To be eligible for
admission, a patient must be at least 60 years of age
and must not have an illness such as tuberculosis
which would require treatment in a special type of
hospital. There are no restrictions because of race,
sex, financial status, or religion.2 The administrator
of the home is Mother Frances Michael, who acts as
Mother Superior to the Sisters at the home and is
technically responsible to the Archbishop of the
Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., and takes orders
from the Mother General of the Carmelite Order.
The assistant administrator director of nurses and
nursing training, and administrative bookkeeper are
all Sisters, as are 11 other persons living and working
at the home.
The Employer urges the Board to decline to assert
jurisdiction over it because it contends the home is
not just "religiously associated" but is a completely
religious operation. It argues that the Employer's
facility is distinguishable from the facility in Drexel
Home, Inc., 182 NLRB 1045, because it is funded
almost entirely by residents rather than outside
groups and is not affiliated with a fundraising
organization. We find no merit in these contentions.
In Bethany Home for the Aged, 185 NLRB No. 85,
jurisdiction was asserted over an extended care
facility where the administrator and assistant admin-
istrator were both Lutheran ministers who conducted
services in accordance with the concepts of the
American Lutheran Church. Additionally, that facili-
ty provided its residents, most of whom were of the
Lutheran faith, with a continuous program of Bible
studies, spiritual counseling, and other religious
services. In that case, we cited Drexel for its rejection
of the argument that an institution's effect on
commerce may be measured by its nonprofit status,
its title, its religious affiliation, or its occupants.
The Employer herein does not conduct religious
services or religious studies and does not restrict
eligibility to patients of a particular faith. There is no
evidence that the home is operated any differently
because it is operated by a religious order than it
would be if it were operated by a nonprofit
organization unaffiliated with any religious organiza-
tion. Contrary to the Employer's assertions, the
operation is not a completely religious one but is
"religiously associated." Accordingly, the principles
I After the close of the hearing, a stipulation entered into by the forwarded to the Board . We hereby make this stipulation part of the record
Employer and the Petitioner elaborating on the working conditions , duties, 2 There is a nondenominational chapel at the home.
and obligations of the nuns was received by the Regional Director and
202 NLRB No. 7
68 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
set forth in Drexel, Bethany, and Good Samaritan
Hospital3 are fully applicable herein and, as the
Employer receives in excess `of $100,000 in gross
revenues per annum, we find that it will effectuate
the .purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction over the
Employer's facility.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concern-
ing the representation of certain employees of the
Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of "all
employees . . . excluding office clerical employees,
registered nurses, dieticians, admission clerks,
switchboard operators, medical secretaries, nuns,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act." There
are 15 Sisters of the Order living and working at the
home. This group consists of the four administrative
officers, three registered nurses, four licensed practi-
cal nurses, one occupational therapist, one recrea-
tional therapist, and two nurses aides.4
The Employer concedes that the unit should not
include the Sisters in the administrative operations or
the Sisters who are registered nurses but contends
that the Sisters who are licensed practical nurses and
nurses aides should be included because they
perform the same functions as the lay personnel. We
disagree.
The nuns who work at the home are all members of
the same Order which owns and operates the home
and whose principal function is providing nursing
care for aged and infirm persons. Although they
work the same hours and shifts as the lay personnel
engaged in the same type of work, the Sisters are on a
separate payroll and are paid a monthly salary,
unlike the other nonsupervisory personnel who are
paid biweekly on an hourly basis. The 15 Sisters
receive a total of $3,000 per month as salary, which is
reflected by bookkeeping entries only, and no actual
cash payment is made directly to any of the Sisters.
This salary is held in a common pool from which
payments are made on behalf of the individual
Sisters according to their personal needs, although no
Sister has a right to demand or keep her full monthly
share of the salary. Each Sister may use up to $20 for
incidental personal needs such as cards, stamps, and
special lunches, but any money remaining after
payment for the general and incidental needs of the
Sisters is forwarded monthly to the Mother house in
Germantown, New York. A vow of ". . . poverty
and obedience according to the rule and constitution
of the congregation of the Carmelite Sisters for the
Aged and Infirm" is taken by each of the Sisters.
On the basis of the foregoing, we find that the
Sisters have special interests resulting in a special
employment relationship clearly different from that
of other employees. Accordingly, we shall exclude
them from the unit.5
The Employer further objects to the inclusion of
the personnel in the dietary department because
those employees are mostly part-time workers, many
of whom are young students between the ages of 14
and 20, and because they are concerned with only
the operations of the kitchen and dining room,
cannot venture into other areas of the home, and
have no direct connection with the medical aspects
of the home. Again we disagree. The dietary
department personnel come in frequent contact with
the patients in the dining room and are a logical part
of the overall unit sought by the Petitioner. Addition-
ally, we note that the Employer does not allege, nor
does the record indicate, that the part-time employ-
ees are employed on other than a regular basis.
Accordingly, we shall include them in the unit.
Therefore, we find that the following employees of
the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All employees employed by the Employer at its
Hyattsville, Maryland, location, but excluding
office clerical employees, registered nurses, dieti-
cians, admission clerks, switchboard operators,
medical secretaries, nuns, guards, and supervisors
as defined in the Act.
[Direction of Election and Excelsior footnote
omitted from publication.]
3 Good Samaritan Hospital a/k/a Good Samaritan Home for the Aged, 185 4 There are 8 other LPN's and 53 other nurses aides who are not Sisters
NLRB No 86 5 See Seton Hill College, 201 NLRB No 155.