CLOSEClose Law.com Menu
 
X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
CASE TYPE: Establishment clause CASE: University of Great Falls v. NLRB COURT: U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit RESULT: NLRB cannot recognize union at religious college Articulating a new test, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Feb. 12 that the National Labor Relations Board has no jurisdiction over a religiously affiliated university and cannot recognize a faculty union there. University of Great Falls v. NLRB, No. 00-1415. In recognizing a chapter of the Montana Federation of Teachers, the NLRB had ruled that the university lacked a “substantial religious character.” For instance, the board noted, the curriculum did not have a particular emphasis on Catholicism, and only 32 percent of the student body was Catholic. But the D.C. Circuit agreed with the school that “the very inquiry by the NLRB into the University’s religious character” violated the principles of a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court case, NLRB v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago. Writing for the court, Circuit Judge David B. Sentelle characterized the board’s inquiry as, “is [the school] sufficiently religious?” But, the court said, if the school is “open-minded, that does not make it any less religious, nor NLRB interference any less a potential infringement of religious liberty.” The court adopted a bright-line, three-part test proposed by amici curiae, a group of educational associations and religious schools. The test took its cues from Catholic Bishop and a 1986 1st Circuit case, Universidad Central de Bayamon v. NLRB, authored by then-Circuit Judge Stephen G. Breyer. It exempts an institution from NLRB jurisdiction if the school holds itself out as providing a religious environment; is nonprofit; and is affiliated with, or owned, operated or controlled, directly or indirectly, by a recognized religious organization. The court did not adopt “the full expanse” of the third step because it was undisputed that the university is affiliated with an order of Catholic nuns. The test was crafted by Sidley Austin Brown & Wood partner Gene C. Schaerr and associate Nicholas P. Miller, who both work in the Chicago firm’s Washington, D.C., office. “Because we represented the amici, we had the luxury of focusing on Catholic Bishop, which we felt was of most interest to our clients,” Schaerr said. “We felt the NLRB had legitimate concerns, but we also wanted to preserve the autonomy of religious schools.” Schaerr said an en banc rehearing is unlikely because the decision was unanimous. Nicholas Trott Long, a Providence, R.I., solo practitioner who represented the university, explained why the school didn’t recognize the union. “The faculty really is part of university management,” he said. “You can’t take a model developed for the industrial workplace and apply it to higher education.” He added, “if the university is required to engage in collective bargaining on matters covered by the strictures of the Roman Catholic church [it] may have to insist that an issue is not negotiable, exposing it to claims of unfair labor practices or failure to bargain in good faith.” Disagreeing, David. J. Strom of Washington, D.C., co-counsel for the union, said collective bargaining was flexible enough to accommodate such situations. He said he does not know yet what the faculty will do next, but “the institution can still recognize the union if it wants to.” The NLRB said its policy was not to comment on cases.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.