Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

are talking about the NLRB won't come down and tell you about it, well, subpena them. That's simple enough.

We are talking about passing a law without anybody really having a good idea of what the ramifications are until after it passes, and then we will live with it.

The CHAIRMAN. Why hasn't this chamber of horrors appeared where there is provision under the law for National Labor Relations Act coverage?

Mr. HICKEY. Well-we believe what we are saying here

The CHAIRMAN. Wouldn't some of this horror story have appeared there

Mr. HICKEY. Well, I am not an expert on what happens throughout the rest of the country. I mean just recently there has been organizations that put stink bombs in patients' rooms.

I am not saying that this is typical. I am saying that we don't know. The committee doesn't know what happens in the bargaining process across the country.

Why not have the unions come in and tell us what happens in proprietary situations? Maybe everything is as you envision. I don't know. Maybe the nonprofit hospitals would say so and if that is so we will back off.

The CHAIRMAN. The bell says I have got to work in another place. At this point I order printed all statements of those who could not attend and other pertinent material submitted for the record. (The material referred to follows:)

[blocks in formation]

Enclosed please find a supplemental statement and proposed amendment to the National Labor Relations Act, submitted on behalf of Metropolitan Hospital, Columbia Hospital for Women, Doctor's Hospital, The Hospital for Sick Children, Fairfax Hospital, and Providence Hospital in regard to the proposed amendment eliminating the exemption for non-profit hospitals from that Act. While it remains the position of the above hospitals that the exemption should be retained, the proposed amendments will protect the public from life-threatening strikes if the exemption is removed.

We would appreciate the opportunity to present our position at the hearings. However, if this is not possible, we would request that the enclosed be included in the appendix to the record of the hearing.

Very truly yours,

Sister Rosa

Sister Rosa, Administrator
Providence Hospital

/eb

September 5, 1972

STATEMENT OF SISTER ROSA, ADMINISTRATOR, PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Senate Subcommittee on Labor, my name is Sister Rosa, Administrator of Providence Hospital located in the District of Columbia and operated by the Daughters of Charity. With me are Messrs. Robert J. Hickey and Robert J. Smith, counsel for Providence Hospital. On August 16, 1972, I submitted a

statement to this Subcommittee presenting the view of several District of Columbia hospitals that House Bill 11357 should not be adopted, at least in its present form. At that time we were invited by the Subcommittee to propose amendments to HR 11357 to correct the deficiencies in that bill in the event that the Subcommittee decided to eliminate the exemption for non-profit hospitals from the National Labor Relations Act. Pursuant to that invitation, we are submitting the following amendments which are attached.

As stated more fully in my earlier statement, the primary deficiency of HR 11357 is that it does not effectively eliminate strikes, picketing, and other activity designed to disrupt hospital operations and to cause death, injury, and suffering to the patients of the hospital affected. Because of both limited resources and the pressures of time, we have not been able to document the facts surrounding strikes at health care facilities throughout the country. We would trust that the Subcommittee would engage in such detailed investigation before any bill is passed. This could be done by a questionnaire jointly prepared by the various associations representing health care facilities and the major unions representing employees of such facilities. If necessary, the Subcommittee could use its subpoena powers to obtain this data.

However, based on news items in the public press and union newspapers, it is clear that strikes do occur and that they are not limited to recognition. They have covered contract negotiations, grievances and jurisdictional disputes. They have lasted from one hour to sixty-seven days (at the University of California Medical Center at Berkeley). The activities have ranged from strikes, picketing and walkouts to sit-ins and sick-outs. Neither the presence nor the absence of a state law prohibiting such activity has been a

-2

deterrent. In this regard, I would like to call the Subcommittee's attention to the following colloquy from LOCAL 1199 NEWS:

"Ana 0. Dumois, director of the Community Health Institute and one of four guest speakers at the conference, urged the union 'to seek other alternatives to a hospital strike. She said 1199 is now powerful enough to 'look for new ways of resolving conflict.'

Pres. Davis, responding to Mrs. Dumois, said that if her advice had been followed in the past there would be no Local 1199 today. 'We came into being violating laws and injunctions. I hope our weapon of the strike is never used, but we will never give that weapon up,' Davis declared."

In keeping with that spirit, Local 1199 was able to extort a contract from New York hospitals after threatening to close them all down if they did not meet its demands.

Our proposed amendments not only prohibit strikes and other disruptive activity [proposed Section 13(b)], but also contain severe sanctions for breaches of such laws. Proposed Section 10 (n) provides for the immediate issuance of a temporary restraining order and for substantial fines (which cannot be waived) for each day on strike. Proposed Section 303 (c) requires unions to reimburse both the hospital and patients for damages caused by the union's illegal conduct. Present Section 8(a)(3) has been amended to provide that a health care facility may immediately discharge or discipline an employee who has engaged in such unlawful activity. In addition, the Act has been amended to eliminate unit fragmentation [proposed amendment to Section 9(b)] and organizational activity on hospital property [proposed amendment to Section 8(a) (1)], both of which have inherent in them the possibility of disrupting the delivery of health care and of and injury to the patient.

The proposed amendments would grant to hospital unions the opportunity to achieve recognition through the NLRB election procedures. In substitution of the right to strike, the proposed amendments provide for the peaceful resolution of disputes between health care facilities and unions. Thus, proposed Section 8 (d) (2) established detailed procedures for the resolution of disputes over

86-073 0 - 72-9

-3

the terms and conditions of a new collective bargaining agreement. Also, proposed Section 8 (g) would eliminate disputes over the interpretation and application of collective bargaining contracts by requiring the parties to have in their contracts a clause providing for the adjustment of such disputes.

The amendments we have proposed will reduce or eliminate most of the major deficiencies of HR 11357. However, without more facts we cannot say that the National Labor Relations Act, even as modified by our proposed amendments, can be applied to health care facilities without further revisions. We again strongly recommend that this Subcommittee conduct additional investigations and hearings before any bill is adopted.

This statement is respectfully submitted on behalf of Columbia Hospital for Women, Doctor's Hospital, Metropolitan Hospital, The Hospital for Sick Children, Fairfax Hospital, and Providence Hospital.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »