Fairmont General Hospital

105 Lab. Arb. Rep. 247 (1995)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Fairmont General Hospital

Labor Arbitration
105 Lab. Arb. Rep. 247 (1995)

Facts

A union (plaintiff) represented the employees of the Medical Records Department (department) at Fairmont General Hospital, Inc. (hospital) (defendant). A six-month backlog of transcriptions of medical-record dictation developed in the department. The backlog threatened the hospital’s accreditation because it was longer than the minimum required time for transcriptions of dictations that was imposed by an accreditation commission. Although physicians had complained about delays in transcriptions, the backlog was present only a month before the accreditation commission was scheduled to review the hospital’s accreditation. Accordingly, the hospital contacted a subcontractor, which indicated that it could transcribe the backlog before the accreditation review. Under a labor agreement between the hospital and the union, the hospital was authorized to contract out union work under some circumstances. But the hospital was required to use union personnel if reasonable and practical and to confer with the union in good faith to avoid contracting union work. The hospital met with the union to discuss the possibility of subcontracting the work. The union responded that it could also meet the deadline if transcription employees worked overtime. The hospital countered that the employees had months to complete the transcriptions but had failed to do so, even when working overtime. The hospital ultimately subcontracted the work and had the backlog transcribed. The union brought a grievance, arguing that the hospital did not comply with the contracting provisions. According to the union, these provisions required the union’s consent before the hospital could contract out work. The hospital responded that union approval of contracting was not required; instead, the hospital was required only to confer with the union in good faith. Because the hospital conferred with the union in good faith here, the hospital argued, it complied with the provisions. The parties submitted the matter to arbitration.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Dean, Arbitrator)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 830,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership