Pennsylvania Power Co., 1104 (1991)

National Labor Relations Board

Linked as:

Extract


Pennsylvania Power Co., 1104 (1991)

DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

301 NLRB No. 138

Pennsylvania Power and Light Company and Local 1600, International

Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO. Case 4-CA-16213

FEBRUARY 28, 1991

DECISION AND ORDER*

BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS DEVANEY AND OVIATT

On January 21, 1988, Administrative Law Judge Walter H. Maloney

issued the attached decision. The Respondent, the General Counsel, and

the Charging Party filed exceptions, supporting briefs, and reply

briefs.

The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in

this proceeding to a three-member panel.

The Board has considered the decision and the record in light of the

exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings,\1\

findings, and conclusions only to the extent consistent with this

Decision and Order.\2\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------\1\The judge failed to rule on the Charging Party's motion to reopen

the record but relied on the evidence it sought to introduce in his

decision. We find sufficient record evidence to support his decision and

find the error harmless, however.

\2\The General Counsel's request for a visitatorial clause is denied

as unnecessary. Cherokee Marine Terminal, 287 NLRB 1080 (1988).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------A. FACTS

The Respondent is a large public utility employing approximately

5000 bargaining unit employees. The collective-bargaining agreement

between the parties includes grievance and arbitration provisions. In

January 1984, the Respondent implemented a drug and alcohol policy\3\

which prohibits, inter alia, the use, sale, or possession of drugs on

company property by employees and prohibits drug use during off-hours if

that use impairs on-the-job performance. Pursuant to this policy an

employee may be sent to a physician for blood and urine testing if there

is a ``suspicion'' that he is under the influence of drugs. If an

employee refuses to see the physician or to be tested, he is sent home

and suspended; if the employee does not cooperate with a medical

evaluation following testing, he will usually be terminated.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------\3\It is unclear from ...

See the full content of this document

Sponsored links




ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.

Contents in vLex United States

Explore vLex

For Professionals

For Partners

Company