Opinion ID: 432214
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Equal Access Remedy

Text: 65 Saint Francis' regulations prohibit employee solicitations and distributions on work time in work areas, but the Hospital conducted some of its own campaign efforts in the Hospital during work hours. The ALJ addressed this discrepancy by ordering the Hospital to grant the Union equal access to Hospital employees with no requirement that it pay for the employees' lost work-time. 263 NLRB at 845. The Board reversed, stating that equal access is an extraordinary remedy that is not warranted in this case. The Union petitions this court, not to provide the Union access to employees at work during work hours, but to deprive the Hospital of any such access. This alternative argument was not presented to the Board. Because the Union is barred from raising a new argument on appeal, we do not reach the merits of its claim. Section 10(e) of the Act specifies: No objection that has not been urged before the Board ... shall be considered by the court, unless the failure or neglect to urge such objection shall be excused because of extraordinary circumstances. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 160(e) (1976). The Union has not identified any extraordinary circumstances that prevented it from filing a rehearing or reconsideration petition with the Board before it brought this action in the Court of Appeals. See Teamsters Local 115, 640 F.2d at 398 (a petition for reconsideration would have allowed the Board to apply its labor relations expertise to the problem). We therefore do not have jurisdiction to consider the Union's equal access claim.