Memorial Hospital of Salem County

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 3, 2011

04-RC-021697 (N.L.R.B. Aug. 3, 2011)

1
NOT INCLUDED IN LBH
BOUND VOLUMES Salem, NJ
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
SALEM HOSPITAL CORPORATION a/k/a
THE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL OF SALEM
COUNTY
Employer
and Case 4-RC-21697
HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AND ALLIED
EMPLOYEES (HPAE)
Petitioner
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
The National Labor Relations Board, by a three-member
panel, has considered objections to an election held September 1
and September 2, 2010, and the administrative law judge’s
decision recommending disposition of them.1 The election was
conducted pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election. The
tally of ballots shows 73 ballots for and 48 against the
Petitioner, with no void ballots and 21 challenged ballots, an
insufficient number to affect the results.

1 On February 22, 2011, the Board issued an Order in this
proceeding ruling that the Employer’s Objections 1-16 did not
raise substantial and material factual issues that would warrant
a hearing. On March 8, 2011, the Employer filed a motion for
reconsideration of that Order. The Employer’s motion is denied
as it fails to raise any issues warranting reconsideration by
the Board.
2
The Board has reviewed the record in light of the
exceptions and briefs,2 has adopted the judge’s findings3 and
recommendations, and finds that a certification of
representative should be issued.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
IT IS CERTIFIED that a majority of the valid ballots have
been cast for Health Professionals and Allied Employees (HPAE),
and that it is the exclusive collective-bargaining
representative of the employees in the following appropriate
unit:
All full-time, regular part-time, and per-diem
Registered Nurses, including Staff Nurses, Case
Managers, and Charge Nurses, employed by the Employer
at The Memorial Hospital of Salem County located at
Woodstown Road, Salem, New Jersey, excluding all other
employees, managers, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.

2 The Employer filed 20 objections, but withdrew Objection 17
before the hearing. The Employer excepted to the judge’s
recommendations to overrule Objections 1 through 16 and
Objections 18 through 20.
3 In adopting the judge’s recommendations, we do not rely on his
statement that the Employer was obliged to present testimony by
the Board agent who conducted the election to establish
misconduct by her. In any event, on its face, the Board agent’s
conduct clearly was not objectionable. Indeed, Chairman Liebman
and Member Becker find the entirety of the Employer’s exceptions
wholly baseless. As in C&G Heating and Air, 356 NLRB No. 133,
slip op. at 2 fn.5 (2011), Member Hayes finds no need at this
stage of Board representation case proceedings to characterize
the relative strength, or lack thereof, in argument made and
evidence adduced in support of the exceptions.
3
Dated, Washington, D.C., August 3, 2011
______________________________________
Wilma B. Liebman, Chairman
______________________________________
Craig Becker, Member
______________________________________
Brian E. Hayes, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD