This study presents a program developed and used by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Office of the General Counsel to reduce the time needed to process unfair labor practice and representation cases involving the rights of employees, employers, and unions.

In the late 1950s, the processing of cases took an unduly long time and large case backlogs resulted. The agency's poor performance was widely known. In an address to the Allegheny County Bar Association in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, then Senator John F. Kennedy complained of the delay in processing of matters before administrative agencies. Re cited particularly the delays experienced in processing a case before the National Labor Relations Board. In response to this situation, NLRB developed (in 1959) the "case management system, a program which has virtually eliminated processing backlogs and placed case handling on a reasonably current basis.

The remainder of this chapter describes NLRB's responsibilities and work. Chapter 2 presents agency productivity achievements and a detailed description of the case management system. Study conclusions are presented in chapter 3.

NLRB ADMINISTRATION

The National Labor Relations Board is an independent Federal agency created in 1935 (Wagner Act) by Congress to administer the basic law governing relations between labor unions and business enterprises engaged in interstate commerce. The Act has been substantially amended in 1947, 1959, and 1974 with each amendment increasing the scope of NLRB's regulatory powers.

The purpose of the nation's primary labor relations law is to serve the public interest by reducing interruptions in commerce caused by industrial strife. It seeks to do this by providing orderly processes for protecting and implementing the respective rights of employees, employers, and unions in their relations with one another. The overall job of the NLRB is to administer, interpret, and enforce the Act.

In its statutory assignment, the NLRB has two principal functions: (1) to determine and implement, through secret-ballot elections, the free democratic choice by employees as to whether they wish to be represented by a union in dealing with their employers and, if so, by which union, and (2) to prevent and remedy unfair labor practices by either employers or unions or both. The NLRB does not act on its own motion in either function but processes only those charges of unfair labor practices and petitions for employee elections filed in NLRB's 49 regional, subregional, and resident offices.

The Act's unfair labor practice provisions place certain restrictions on employers and labor organizations in their dealings with employees and with each other. Its election provisions provide mechanics for conducting and certifying results of representation elections to determine the collective-bargaining wishes of employees, including whether a union shall continue to have the right to make a union-shop contract with an emplover.

In handling unfair labor practice cases and election Detitions, the NLRB is concerned with adjusting labor disputes either by settlements or through its quasi-judicial proceedings, or by way of secret ballot emolovee elections. NLRB authority is divided by law and by delegation between the five-member Board and the General Counsel, all Presidential appointees. The Board primarily acts as a quasi-judicial body in deciding cases on formal records. The General Counsel issues and prosecutes formal complaints. in cases leading to Board decisions. He has general supervision of NLRB's nationwide network of field offices.

The NLRB has no independent statutory power to enforce its decisions and orders. It may, however, seek enforcement in the U.S. courts of appeals, and parties to its cases also may seek judicial review. In conducting formal hearings in unfair labor practice cases, the NLRB employs administrative law judges who hear and decide cases. Administrative law judges' decisions may be appealed to the Board by the filing of exceptions. If no exceptions are taken, the administrative law judges' orders become orders of the Board.

AGENCY STAFF AND RESOURCES

About 90 percent of the approximately 55,000 unfair labor practice and representation cases coming before NLRB annually are resolved without formal litigation and are disposed of informally by the agency's 33 regional offices. The allocation of agency resources reflects the importance of regional offices. Operating on a budget of approximately 100 million dollars for fiscal year 1979, the agency employed about 3,000 employees. Approximately 2,000 professional and clerical positions were allocated to the regional offices, 350 to the Board and its Division of Judges, and 600 to the Washington Office of the General Counsel.

Each of the agency's regional offices is headed by a Regional Director responsible for managing the office and for the investigation and initial determination on the merits of the unfair labor practice and representation cases filed in that regional office.

Each regional office is staffed on the basis of its caseload. Nonsupervisory professional positions are divided about equally between Field Attorneys and Labor-Management Relations Examiners (Field Examiners) who work on teams of six to eight members. The teams are supervised by either an Attorney or Field Examiner. Administrative matters, case assignment, and case processing are generally assigned to an Assistant to the Regional Director. The Regional Attorney is responsible for legal matters.

CHAPTER 2

THE CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

During the late 1950s, the processing of NLRB cases took an unduly long time. While these delays were recognized by most people associated with the agency, they were concerned that any attempt to shorten the processing time frame might substantially infringe on the rights of parties in cases before NLRB or on the quality of the agency's work. They also realized that telling the staff to work faster without any other efforts and controls would be impractical and probably counter-productive.

To resolve the delays and backlogs, a concept was developed to achieve greater productivity by managing stages of cases handling. Thus, rather than setting an overall goal for processing a case from beginning to end, interim goals were set for each stage of case handling. This concept is quite simple and is still being used. At the same time this system was developed (1959), NLRB also devised an information system to give headquarters staff and Regional Directors data to evaluate performance and identify problems.

The remainder of chapter 2 presents several NLRB productivity achievements, a detailed description of its case processing procedures, the case control system, and its management information system.

PRODUCTIVITY ACHIEVEMENTS

Since the inception of the case management system, marked improvements have been made in regional office performance and in service to the public. These improvements have been achieved during a time in which NLRB's total case intake has tripled. Chart 1 shows case intake by unfair labor practice charges and representation petitions for fiscal years 1968 through 1978.

NLRB's most dramatic productivity achievements have occurred in processing unfair labor practice cases. For example, the median "age" of cases pending under preliminary investigation dropped 62 percent from 52.5 days in 1958 to 20 days in 1978. Regional offices processed cases from filing of charges to issuance of complaints in a median of 47 days during FY78, a significant decrease over the 1959 average of 116 days. Chart 2 presents data on unfair labor-practice proceedings for 11 years (1968–78).

These are but two examples of the reductions in case processing time achieved under the case management system. Similar improvements have been made in many other aspects of regional office performance percentage of cases successfully litigated, percentage of cases settled, and output per professional.

CASE HANDLING PROCEDURES

The statutory processes of the National Labor Relations Act are not self-initiating. Rather, they begin with the filing of an unfair labor practice charge or a representation petition by a person or an organization. While the steps taken in the processing of petitions and charges are quite different, they do have similarities. For example, both proceedings provide for investigation by the Regional Director as to whether to proceed with the case. In fact, most cases are processed to finality in the regional offices without formal consideration by the Board, General Counsel, or the courts.

Unfair Labor Practice Cases

Procedures for processing an unfair labor practice charge begin with the filing of the charge. It is then investigated by a regional office. Upon completion of the investigation, the Regional Director reviews the evidence and the recommendation of the investigator and the supervisory staff. If he concludes that there is sufficient evidence to support the allegations of the charge and the case is not settled, he issues an unfair labor practice complaint and sets the matter for hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. If the Regional Director determines that the charge lacks merit, the charge is dismissed if it is not withdrawn by the charging party. A dismissed charge may be appealed directly to the General Counsel, who may reverse or sustain the Director's decision. If reversed, the matter is returned to the regional office for issuance of a complaint. If the Director's decision is sustained by the General Counsel, the matter is closed.

At an unfair labor practice hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the General Counsel is represented by an attorney from the regional office who acts as a prosecutor of the complaint, and all parties are given onnortunities to present evidence. Appeal from the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is to the Board.

Representation Cases

A representation case is assigned to a professional employee for investigation. In the absence of evidence warranting administrative dismissal, the professional attempts to get the parties to agree as to the unit in which the election should be held, the complement of that unit, and an appropriate time and place for an election. An agreement for an election must be approved by the Regional Director.

If there is no agreement, the matter is scheduled for a hearing before a Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer, usually a professional from the regional office, is precluded from making findings of fact or recommendations on the case. After the hearing is closed, the case record is reviewed and a decision is issued by the Regional Director. Any party may appeal this decision directly to the Board. Once the issues involved are resolved by a Regional Director or Board decision, an election may be directed or the petition dismissed.