Deaconess Hospital of Buffalo, New York

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 24, 1976

226 N.L.R.B. 1143 (N.L.R.B. 1976)

DEACONESS HOSPITAL OF BUFFALO, N Y.
Deaconess Hospital of Buffalo, New York and Buffalo
House Staff Association , Petitioner . Case 3-RC-
6266
November 24, 1976
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS FANNING
AND JENKINS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held on March 26 and 31 and April 4,
1975, before Hearing Officer Richard L. Ahearn.
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, by direction of the Regional Director
for Region 3, this case was transferred to the Board
for decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the pur-
poses of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. As we find hereinafter that interns, residents,
and fellows are not "employees" within the meaning
of the Act and Petitioner is composed solely of in-
terns, residents, and fellows, we find, for purposes of
this proceeding, that the Petitioner is not a labor or-
ganization within the meaning of the Act.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concern-
ing the representation of employees of the Employer
1143
within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and 2(6) and
(7) of the Act for the following reasons:
The Petitioner herein seeks to represent a unit of
interns and residents at the Deaconess Hospital.' The
Employer contends that interns and residents are stu-
dents and not employees, and that fellows should be
included in any unit found appropriate. For the rea-
sons set forth in Cedars-Sinai Medical Center,2 we
find merit in the Employer's position regarding in-
terns and residents. In Cedars-Sinai, the Board found
that interns, residents, and clinical fellows, although
they possess certain employee characteristics, are pri-
marily students, and therefore concluded that they
are not employees within the meaning of Section 2(3)
of the Act. The interns, residents, and fellows in-
volved herein are not unlike those interns, residents,
and clinical fellows involved in Cedars-Sinai. There-
fore, we conclude that they are primarily students.
Accordingly, as no question affecting commerce ex-
ists concerning representation of "employees" of the
Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c) of the
Act, we shall dismiss the petition here.'
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
MEMBER FANNING , dissenting,
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 223 NLRB 251, I dis-
sent from the dismissal of this petition.
' The Petitioner does not seek to represent fellows, but agreed at the
hearing to participate in an election with fellows if a unit including them
were found appropriate
t 223 NLRB 251 (1976)
3 The Employer also contends that it is anoint employer with other hospi-
tals to which the interns and residents are rotated for varying periods of
time The Petitioner contends that the Employer is a single Employer Inas-
much as we find that the interns, residents, and fellows are not employees.
we find it unnecessary to decide this issue
226 NLRB No. 164