Rock Hill Convalescent Center, 881 (1976)

Extract

---

Rock Hill Convalescent Center, 881 (1976)

ROCK HILL CONVALESCENT CENTER

Rock Hill Convalescent Center and Service Employees International Union, Local 579, AFL-CIO.

Case 11-CA-6120

November 10, 1976 DECISION AND ORDER

BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS FANNING

AND PENELLO

On May 28, 1976, Administrative Law Judge John F. Corbley issued the attached Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and the General Counsel filed an answering brief.

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.

The Board has considered the record and the attached Decision in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings,' findings, and conclusions 2 of the Administrative Law Judge and to adopt his recommended Order.3 ORDER

Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re1 The Respondent has excepted to certain credibility findings made by the Administrative Law Judge It is the Board's established policy not to overrule an Administrative Law Judge's resolutions with respect to credibility unless the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence convinces us that the resolutions are incorrect Standard Dry Wall Products, Inc, 91

NLRB 544 (1950), enfd 188 F 2d 362 (C A 3, 1951). We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing his findings 2 Although St John's Hospital and School of Nursing, Inc, 222 NLRB 1150 (1976), was on the facts limited to no-solicitation , no-distribution rules in hospitals, we agree with the Administrative Law Judge that the considerations which led to our holding therein are equally applicable here Accordingly, we affirm his finding that Respondent 's no-solicitation rule is unlawfully broad 3 Respondent's extraordinary motion to take additional evidence is hereby denied inasmuch as the evidence as to the supervisory status of charge nurses which Respondent seeks to present does not constitute newly discovered evidence Sec. 10248 (d)(1) of the Board's Rules and Regulations.

The Respondent has also filed an extraordinary additional ground in support of Respondent's exceptions in which it requests that the instant case be dismissed or, alternatively , remanded to the Administrative Law Judge on the grounds that the employees herein who participated in the May 5 walkoff did not comply with the 10 -day notice provision contained in Sec 8(g) of the Act Thereafter, the General Counsel filed a motion to strike and Respondent filed an opposition to General Counsel's motion The question of the applicability of Sec 8 (g) to the facts of the instant case was neither raised nor litigated before the Administrative Law Judge Further, Respondent has not merely presented an additional ground in support of its exceptions, but has attempted to file a new exception in an untimely manner contrary to Sec 102 46, et seq, of the...

See the full content of this document

---