St. Louis Symphony Orchestra

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Mar 13, 2020

14-RC-236036 (N.L.R.B. Mar. 13, 2020)

1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ST. LOUIS SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA
Employer
and Case 14-RC-236036
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF MUSICIANS
LOCAL 2-197
Petitioner
ORDER
The Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Direction of
Election is denied as it raises no substantial issues warranting review.1

1 In denying review of the Employer’s contention that the Regional Director erred in
directing a self-determination election in this case, we do not rely on his citation to Unisys Corp.,
354 NLRB 825 (2009), a two-member Board decision. See New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB,
560 U.S. 674 (2010). We also do not rely on his citation to DTG Operations, Inc., 357 NLRB
2122 (2011) and Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc., 357 NLRB 2015 (2011). See PCC
Structurals, Inc., 365 NLRB No. 160, slip op. at 8, fn. 39 (2017). With respect to the Regional
Director’s analysis of the community-of-interest factors, we find the significance of the
librarians’ and musicians’ similar skills and training to be overstated but, ultimately, we agree
that they share a community of interest, especially in light of the high degree of functional
integration. We also note, as a secondary consideration, that there does not appear to be an
alternative for the librarians’ representation with another unit or as a stand-alone unit.
Furthermore, we find that the Petitioner’s withdrawal of a bargaining proposal, which sought the
inclusion of the librarians in the musicians’ unit, over twenty years ago is not relevant to whether
the petitioned-for librarians and unit musicians share a community of interest sufficient to
support a self-determination election.
In denying review of the Regional Director’s determination that collaborative or
consensus-based assignments do not establish the exercise of independent judgment within the
meaning of Sec. 2(11) of the Act, we rely upon Frenchtown Acquisition Co. v. NLRB, 683 F.3d
298, 315 (6th Cir. 2012) and Hosp. Gen’l Menonita v. NLRB, 393 F.3d 263, 267 (1st Cir. 2004).
Finally, the Employer did not raise its argument that the Librarian possesses the authority
to adjust grievances to the Regional Director and therefore it is not properly before the Board.
See Sec. 102.67(e) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations (a request for review “may not raise
any issue or allege any facts not timely presented to the Regional Director”).
2
JOHN F. RING, CHAIRMAN
MARVIN E. KAPLAN, MEMBER
WILLIAM J. EMANUEL, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., March 13, 2020.