Opinion ID: 196952
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the board's decision ii. the board's decision

Text: In September 1995 the ALJ published his findings and a proposed order. He determined that the Hospitals had breached their duty to bargain in good faith by withholding information relevant to the performance of the union's undertakings as a collective bargaining representative, and had thereby violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), specifically, 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(1) & (5). The Hospitals took exception to the decision and appealed to the Board. The Board adopted the ALJ's findings and rationale,4 albeit modifying the recommended order slightly. See Providence Hosp., 320 N.L.R.B. No. 60 (Jan. 31, 1996), 1996 WL 48263, at . In light of this adoption, we recount those findings as if they were made ab initio by the Board. The Board first addressed MNA's requests for 4The Board is not obliged to make independent findings or conduct its own analysis of the factors prompting an order where, as here, it expressly adopts the ALJ's findings and reasoning. See NLRB v. Horizon Air Servs., Inc., 761 F.2d 22, 24 n.1 (1st Cir. 1985). 6 information regarding the internal consolidation. It adjudged this information relevant because MNA might well have needed it so that it could determine what legal effect if any [the consolidation] would have on its collective-bargaining agreements with the hospitals, when it should demand bargaining over the effects of the transaction, and what effect the restructuring would have on the bargaining units. See id. at . Turning to the requests regarding the proposed merger, the Board found that information to be relevant, even though not directly linked to terms and conditions of employment. See id. at . It explained that MNA needed to know the impact of the proposed [merger] on its contracts, as well as any other possible effects on the status of the bargaining units. Id. at . Moreover, McCorkle's letters to the employees suggested the possibility that some decisions might have been made which would affect bargaining unit employees. Id.