Hospital, NLRB reach agreement

The unfair labor practice charges filed against Duke University Hospital by the International Union of Operating Engineers disappeared almost as quickly as they appeared late this summer.

Under an agreement with the National Labor Relations Board, Duke Hospital administrators agreed early this month to refrain from six specific activities that roughly correspond to the unfair practice charges filed by the IUOE. A signed statement declaring Duke's commitment now appears in prominent places throughout the Hospital, where it must remain for 60 days after the initial signing date, Aug. 4. In return, the NLRB will not pursue the complaints against the Hospital.

"There was no point in fighting the charges further-we just want to have the election," said Michael Israel, Duke Hospital CEO.

The settlement appears to have toppled the final barrier to letting Duke Hospital's 2,400 nurses vote on whether they wish to join the Local 465 AFL-CIO labor organization.

"September is out of the question but we may have an election in the first two weeks of October," said IUOE representative David Miller, adding that the official date must be set by the NLRB. There can be no election until the 60-day posting period on the settlement notice expires in early October.

In the settlement, the NLRB offers no judgment on the unfair practices, and Duke admits no wrongdoing. However, Howard Neidig, assistant to the NLRB's regional director, confirmed that the board would have issued a complaint, and thereby pursued the IUOE's accusations, had there been no settlement at all. He explained that the National Labor Relations Act focuses on ways to correct committed wrongs. "In this case, that would have amounted to what was obtained in the settlement agreement," he said, adding that Duke administrators were informed that the NLRB planned to issue a complaint regarding some parts of the charges.

Miller said these types of settlements are common in unionization attempts. "The benefits of the scare tactic greatly outweigh the penalty for it," he said, arguing that Duke lost little face by having to post the notices.

Nurses' opinions continue to differ regarding unionization. Union supporters say filing the unfair labor practices was a way of both protecting the integrity of the labor act and sending Duke a message that it must follow the law. But anti-union nurses say the unfair practices were an inappropriate delay tactic.