Document: 499 U.S. 606 111 S.Ct. 1539 113 L.Ed.2d 675 AMERICAN HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, Petitioner,v.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD et al. No. 90-97. Argued Feb. 25, 1991. Decided April 23, Syllabus The National Labor Relations Board has promulgated a rule providing that, with exceptions for, inter alia, cases presenting "extraordinary circumstances," eight, and only defined employee units are appropriate for collective bargaining in acute care hospitals. Petitioner, American Hospital Association, brought this action challenging the rule's facial validity on grounds that (1) § 9(b) of Act (NLRA) requires to make separate unit determination "in each case" therefore prohibits from using general rules define units; (2) violates congressional admonition avoid undue proliferation health industry; (3) is arbitrary capricious. District Court agreed petitioner's second argument enjoined enforcement, but Appeals found no merit any three arguments reversed. Held: Board's not facially invalid. Pp. 609-620. (a) broad rulemaking powers under 6 NLRA authorize limited by 9(b)'s mandate decide case." Contrary reading, clear more natural meaning requirement simply indicate whenever there disagreement between employers employees about appropriateness unit, shall resolve dispute. In doing so, entitled rely it developed certain issues applicability. See, e.g., United States v. Storer Broadcasting Co., 351 192, 205, 76 763, 771-772, 100 L.Ed. 1081. at issue does differ significantly many prior establishing principles adjudication disputes. This interpretation reinforced NLRA's structure policy. Nor petitioner aided sparse legislative history. Even if ambiguity could be after application traditional tools statutory construction, would still defer reasonable text. 609-614. (b) rendered invalid admonition, contained Reports accompanying 1974 extension NLRAcover age all hospitals, should give "[d]ue consideration . preventing industry." admonition—when coupled Congress' 1973 rejection bill have placed limit five number hospital units—evinces an intent emphasize importance persuasive than reliance itself. Moreover, even accepted further suggestion authoritative statement what Congress intended legislation, must read express desire consider special problems might create An examination record reveals gave extensive very issue. event, best understood as warning Board, free fashion remedy noncompliance believes given "due consideration" problem industry. 614-617. (c) not, contends, capricious because ignores critical differences among hospitals country. conclusion absent extraordinary circumstances, such do substantial, significant ways relating was based "reasoned analysis" years experience cases. 617-619. 899 F.2d 651 (CA7 1990), affirmed. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. James D. Holzhauer, Chicago, Ill., petitioner. David L. Shapiro, respondents. Justice STEVENS 1 For first time since (Board or NLRB) established 1935, substantive defining particular line commerce. applicable provides, exceptions, hospital. present which nonconforming already exist, labor organizations seek combine two eight specified units. circumstances exception applies automatically eight-unit will produce fewer employees. See 29 CFR 103.30 (1990). 2 grounds: First, argues (NLRB Act) second, contends formulated and, finally, maintains 3 Northern Illinois enforcement rule. 718 F.Supp. 704 (1989). 1990). Because case, we granted certiorari, 498 894, 242, 112 201 We now affirm. 4 * Petitioner's challenge authority connection determinations terms Act, 49 Stat. 449, U.S.C. 151 seq., originally enacted 1935. made finding "inequality power" unorganized corporate had adversely affected commerce declared policy mitigate eliminate those adverse effects "by encouraging practice procedure protecting exercise workers full freedom association, self-organization, designation representatives their own choosing, purpose negotiating conditions employment other mutual aid protection." 151. central protect facilitate employees' opportunity organize unions represent them collective-bargaining negotiations. 5 Sections 3, 4, created generally described its powers. §§ 153-155. Section "authority make, amend, rescind regulations may necessary carry out provisions" Act. 156. grant unquestionably sufficient case unless some provision Petitioner provides limitation section determine 159(b). persuaded. us put weight these words they can reasonably carry. 7 9(a) representative "designated selected purposes majority purposes" exclusive unit. 159(a). section, light implies initiative selecting resides language suggests "a unit" "appropriate"—not necessarily single most Trustees Masonic Hall Asylum Fund NLRB, 699 626, 634 (CA2 1983); State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 411 356, 358 (CA7) (en banc), cert. denied, 396 832, 90 87, 24 83 (1969); Friendly Ice Cream Corp. 705 570, 574 (CA1 Local 627, Int'l Union Operating Engineers 194 U.S.App.D.C. 37, 41, 595 844, 848 (1979); NLRB Western & Southern Life 391 119, 123 (CA3), 393 978, 89 445, 21 439 (1968). Thus, one union plant, craft, perhaps just portion thereof. 8 Given obvious potential concerning seeking recognition employer—disagreements involve rival claiming jurisdiction over contested segments work force well disagreements management labor—§ authorizes whether designated appropriate. Hearings S.1958 before Senate Committee Education Labor, p. 82 (1935) (hereinafter Hearings), Legislative History 1458 History) (testimony Francis Biddle, Chairman Board); H.R. Rep. 972, 74th Cong., 1st Sess., 20 (1935), 2976. provides: 9 "The whether, order insure benefit right self-organization bargaining, otherwise effectuate policies employer craft plant subdivision thereof." (Emphasis added.) 10 reads emphasized phrase Although contours restriction ascribes murky, reading prevent imposing industry-wide delineating believe inconsistent context statute whole. 11 Under synonymous "whenever necessary" dispute." chose enact require unions, every commerce, also leave decision up alone. Instead, dispute arises Board. 12 resolving dispute, presumably guided basic develops circumscribe guide discretion either process case-by-case authority. disputed cannot fairly logically command standardless case. As noted scholar administrative law observed: "[T]he 'in case' supplanting original discretionary chaos degree order, principal instruments regularizing system deciding classifications, rules, principles, precedents. Sensible men refuse use sensible expect to." K. Davis, Administrative Law Text 6.04, 145 (3d ed. 1972). 13 comports our past interpretations similar provisions regulatory statutes. 1081 (1956); FPC Texaco, Inc., 377 33, 41-44, 84 1105, 1110-1112, (1964); Heckler Campbell, 461 458, 467, 103 1952, 1957, 66 (1983). These decisions confirm scheme individualized determinations, decisionmaker applicability clearly expresses withhold 14 acknowledges "the adopt required determinations." Brief 19. half-century during adjudicated Reply 8-11. however, entire industry qualitatively different rebuttable presumptions considered circumstances. 15 find basis fine distinction draw. contention, irrebuttable presumption; instead, contains circumstances." did establish presumption, adopted apply example, host issues, facility properly classified 16 Our understanding ordinary support construction NLRA. matter drafting, curtail area 6, expected so expressly describing least referring specifically section. And, regard Act's underlying policy, goal facilitating organization certainly served advance portions organizing efforts conducted. 17 history affords assistance. That group "small amendments" suggested Secretary "for sake clarity." Memorandum Comparing S. 2926 1958, (Comm. Print 1935), 1332, Hearings, 1442, 1445; 6288 House 283-284 2757-2758. If amendment been place important scope suggests, expression Cf. Harrison PPG Industries, 446 578, 600-601, 1889, 1901-1902, 64 525 (1980) (REHNQUIST, dissenting). 18 relevant adds nothing conveyed text enacted. relies comment Report "is obviously individual possible workable arrangement impartial government agency, determination." H.R.Rep. comment, restates requiring nowhere "determination 19 sum, contrary advanced employing Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 837, 842-843, 104 2778, 2781-2782, 81 694 (1984). thus conclude 6. II Consideration brief historical review federal Hospitals were "employers" 1947 excepted not-for-profit coverage 152(2) (1970 ed.) (repealed, 1974). 1960, decided proprietary excepted, see Flatbush General Hospital, 126 N.L.R.B. 144, 145, position reversed 1967, Butte Medical Properties, 168 266, 268. 1973, addressed bills extended private institutions, including proposed legislation highly controversial, largely concern unrest especially harmful public. fact specialists employed large units, representation multiply management's burden negotiation increase risk strikes. Motivated concerns, Senator Taft introduced repealed exemption nonprofit institutions. 2292, 93d Sess. (1973). Taft's pass. 22 session same Congress, Amendments 88 395. amendments subjected change ibid. Both statement: 23 "EFFECT ON EXISTING LAW "Bargaining Units 25 "Due connection, notes approval recent Four Seasons Nursing Center, 208 50, 85 LRRM 1093 (1974), Woodland Park 205 26 1075 (1973), trend toward broader enunciated Extendicare West Virginia, 203 170, 1242 (1973).* 27 " *By reference Extendicare, approve holdings decision." 28 S.Rep. 93-766, (1974); 93-1051, pp. 6-7 (1974) U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News 1974, 3946, 3950. not—and not—contend law, Constitution quite explicit follow legislating. Nor, view refused argue constitute proliferation. Rather, primary when five-unit limit, evinces 9(b). 30 Assuming designed explained contravene mandate. Part I, supra. 31 include nonproprietary hospitals." 30. suggestion, Committees "proliferation" Examining proceeding, App. 20, 78-84, 114, 122, 131, 140, 158-159, 191-194, 246-254.* 32 think form notice industry, respond remedy. So read, hands body issued it. Public Employees Retirement System Ohio Betts, 492 158, 168, 109 2854, ----, 106 134 (1989) (legislative tied enactment specific ordinarily carries little judicial statute). issue, response. III 33 final "it 4,000 acute-care States, size, location, operations, work-force organization." 39. supports noting earlier determination, commented diverse character precluded generalizations St. 271 948, 953, n. 39 (1984), remanded sub nom. Electrical Workers 259 814 697 (1987). 34 responds relying proceedings, 13-year period rulemaking. Based experience, formed "considered judgment" "acute units." 188-189. argues, circumstances" adequate take unusual arbitrary. 35 challenged diversity related whereas facilities, nursing homes, blood banks, outpatient clinics. Francis, N.L.R.B., discussion "anticipate[d] records records, recurring factual patterns emerge illustrate typically appropriate." 36 conducted careful analysis comments received, well-reasoned justification new rule, troubled inconsistencies current pronouncements. authorization "from rescind" contemplates possibility reshape information administration question changed industries undermine substantial evidence supported analysis." Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. Mut. 463 29, 42, 57, 2856, 2866, 2874, 77 443 37 units," 189, record. U.S., S.Ct., 2874. previously results diversification inappropriate. 55-59. justified selection detailing factors id., 93-94, 97, 98, 101, 118-120, 123-129, 133-140. 38 point hypothetical lead result render "arbitrary capricious." applications. likely presented arbitrary, departure 103.30(a), assuming, decline face. Commerce Commission Interstate Commission, 249 389, 393-394, 776 355, 359-360 (1985) (Scalia, J.); Aberdeen Rockfish R. 682 1092, 1105 (CA5 1982); cf. FDIC Mallen, 486 230, 247, 108 1780, 1791, 265 (1988) ("A held unconstitutional applied unfair way Court"). opinion, deliberately avoided wisdom propriety avoiding stoppages pretermitted matters unimportant primarily rather legal arguments, judgment 40 It ordered. note fully consistent approved admonition. cases, composed x-ray technicians instead ruled technical grouped together. 888-889 permit Center Joliet, 403 (1974). 103.30(a)

Category: 6