WASHINGTON (PAI) - By a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Bush-appointed GOP majority on the National Labor Relations Board expanded the definition of who is a "supervisor," throwing millions of workers out from under labor law coverage. The rulings in the so-called Kentucky River cases, announced Oct. 3, were widely awaited by unions and management. The construction industry could be affected by the important ruling. AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney and other leaders blasted the rulings, while the California Nurses Association said 30,000 of its members had signed strike authorization cards should their hospitals try to impose the rulings on them,

By Mark Gruenberg
PAI Staff Writer

WASHINGTON (PAI) - By a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Bush-appointed GOP majority on the National Labor Relations Board expanded the definition of who is a "supervisor," throwing millions of workers out from under labor law coverage.

The rulings in the so-called Kentucky River cases, announced Oct. 3, were widely awaited by unions and management. The construction industry could be affected by the important ruling.

AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney and other leaders blasted the rulings, while the California Nurses Association said 30,000 of its members had signed strike authorization cards should their hospitals try to impose the rulings on them, stripping their right to unionize and declaring them supervisors.

"While the Supreme Court's (Kentucky River) decision cracks open the door to a redefinition of who is a supervisor, the decision by the NLRB virtually kicks it in," Sweeney said of the main ruling, Oakwood Healthcare Inc. vs. UAW. Eight million workers or more could be affected.

Quoting the NLRB's dissenters, Sweeney added the Bush-named majority's rulings "threaten to create a new class of workers under labor law: Workers who have neither genuine prerogatives of management, nor the statutory rights of ordinary employees.

Many union leaders blamed not just the board, but the anti-worker GOP president himself.

David Cohen, an AFL-CIO Department for Professional Employees attorney who worked on the cases, told Press Associates: "Professionals usually vote. When they vote this November, they should remember who appointed the people who made this decision," Bush and the GOP.

The NLRB's Republican majority broadened who is a supervisor by writing new definitions for several terms labor law uses to define "supervisors."

One was to "assign" other workers to various tasks. The NLRB majority said the duty of assigning had to be more than intermittent. The two dissenters said the board left the word so open that virtually any worker who gave an assignment to another at any time could be a supervisor. This "threatens to sweep almost all staff nurses outside the (National Labor Relations) act's protection," the dissenters said.

The second definition the board majority broadened said a supervisor was a worker with the duty to "responsibly to direct" others. That meant, in plain English, the worker who directed the others could be held responsible for their actions.

The third expanded definition said more workers who exercise "independent judgment" on the job are now supervisors and thus outside labor law. It was that definition, Department for Professional Employees President Paul Almeida told Press Associates, that would evict most professionals from labor law coverage and union protection.
Almeida, a Professional and Technical Engineer, explained that in many professions - including his own but also including construction - even lower-level workers instruct and monitor apprentices. "In the trades, an electrician can be a foreman on one job and a journeyman (worker) on another," he noted. The board did not say what would happen to building trades workers who shuttle between being foremen and regular posts.

The board majority went to some lengths to rebut charges it is throwing millions of workers out from under labor law coverage, leaving them open to management whims. It said, for example, that nurses exercising "independent judgment" could be supervisors only if their decisions "were not of a routine nature." And it said workers who are supervisors "part of the time" would still be employees, protected by labor law. But it then noted that past rulings said a worker who manages others as little as 10 percent-15 percent of the time is a "supervisor" and not protected by labor law. 

stripping their right to unionize and declaring them supervisors. "While the Supreme Court's (Kentucky River) decision cracks open the door to a redefinition of who is a supervisor, the decision by the NLRB virtually kicks it in," Sweeney said of the main ruling, Oakwood Healthcare Inc. vs. UAW. Eight million workers or more could be affected. Quoting the NLRB's dissenters, Sweeney added the Bush-named majority's rulings "threaten to create a new class of workers under labor law: Workers who have neither genuine prerogatives of management, nor the statutory rights of ordinary employees. Many union leaders blamed not just the board, but the anti-worker GOP president himself. David Cohen, an AFL-CIO Department for Professional Employees attorney who worked on the cases, told Press Associates: "Professionals usually vote. When they vote this November, they should remember who appointed the people who made this decision," Bush and the GOP. The NLRB's Republican majority broadened who is a supervisor by writing new definitions for several terms labor law uses to define "supervisors." One was to "assign" other workers to various tasks. The NLRB majority said the duty of assigning had to be more than intermittent. The two dissenters said the board left the word so open that virtually any worker who gave an assignment to another at any time could be a supervisor. This "threatens to sweep almost all staff nurses outside the (National Labor Relations) act's protection," the dissenters said. The second definition the board majority broadened said a supervisor was a worker with the duty to "responsibly to direct" others. That meant, in plain English, the worker who directed the others could be held responsible for their actions. The third expanded definition said more workers who exercise "independent judgment" on the job are now supervisors and thus outside labor law. It was that definition, Department for Professional Employees President Paul Almeida told Press Associates, that would evict most professionals from labor law coverage and union protection. Almeida, a Professional and Technical Engineer, explained that in many professions - including his own but also including construction - even lower-level workers instruct and monitor apprentices. "In the trades, an electrician can be a foreman on one job and a journeyman (worker) on another," he noted. The board did not say what would happen to building trades workers who shuttle between being foremen and regular posts. The board majority went to some lengths to rebut charges it is throwing millions of workers out from under labor law coverage, leaving them open to management whims. It said, for example, that nurses exercising "independent judgment" could be supervisors only if their decisions "were not of a routine nature." And it said workers who are supervisors "part of the time" would still be employees, protected by labor law. But it then noted that past rulings said a worker who manages others as little as 10 percent-15 percent of the time is a "supervisor" and not protected by labor law.