Howard University

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 24, 1975

221 N.L.R.B. 727 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

HOWARD UNIVERSITY
Howard University and Allied International Union of
Security Guards and Special Police , Petitioner.
Case 5-RC-9363
November 24, 1975
RULING ON ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS
FANNING, JENKINS, AND PENELLO
Relying on the matter of Howard University, 211
NLRB 247 (1974), wherein a majority of the Board,
then Chairman Miller and Members Jenkins and
Kennedy, with Members Fanning and Penello
dissenting, refused -to assert jurisdiction over the
instant Employer, the Regional Director dismissed
the petition herein on jurisdictional grounds. There-
after, the Petitioner filed a request for review of this
action, urging reconsideration of the holding in the
above-mentioned precedent.
Having duly considered the matter, Members
Fanning and Penello still adhere, to the dissenting
views expressed in the prior case, and Chairman
Murphy believes that under all the circumstances,
including the fact that the Board will be called upon
to decide a similar jurisdictional issue involving
Gallaudet College, the jurisdictional issue here
involved should be reconsidered. Contrary to the
suggestion in the dissenting view of Member Jenkins,
the action of reconsideration after a change in Board
composition is not novel. See, e.g., International Hod
Carriers Building and Common Laborers Union of
America, Local 840, AFL-CIO (C. A. Blinne Con-
struction Company), 135 NLRB 1153 (1962), and
727
International Hod Carriers, Building and Common
Laborers ' Union of America, Local No.' 41, AFL-CIO
(Calumet Construction), 133 NLRB 512 (1961).
Accordingly, the petition is hereby reinstated and
the case remanded to the Regional Director for
hearing. Upon conclusion of said hearing , the case
shall be transferred to the Board for decision.
MEMBER JENKINS, dissenting:
For institutional reasons I dissent from the action
of the Board reinstating this petition. In June 1974, a
little over a year ago , this Board carefully weighed
the pros and cons concerning whether to assert
jurisdiction over Howard University . All of the
arguments advanced in support of the instant
petition were before us at that time . After carefully
viewing the interrelationship between the Federal
Government and Howard University and examining
the unique ' character of that relationship , which we
found to be unlike any other comparable institution,
we concluded that it would be inappropriate for us to
assert jurisdiction over the University and we
declined to do so.
In the intervening 16 months no change has
occurred with respect to the relationship between the
Federal Government and,Howard University. The
only change that has occurred is in the composition
of the membership of this Board . If precedent is to be
reconsidered each time there is a change in the
membership of the Board, it is likely that the lifespan
of precedent on which reliance may, be placed may
be reduced to 18 months . The Regional Director has
properly applied Board precedent and I would affirm
his dismissal of the petition herein.
221 NLRB No. 152