Alpha-X Corporation

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 26, 1983

267 N.L.R.B. 486 (N.L.R.B. 1983)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Alpha-X Corporation and Freight Drivers and Help-
ers Local Union No. 557, affiliated with Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL-
CIO. Case 5-CA-12661
26 August 1983
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND HUNTER
On 27 January 1982 the National Labor Rela-
tions Board issued an Order' in the above-entitled
proceeding in which it directed, inter alia, that Re-
spondent make whole Patricia Williamson for any
loss of pay she may have suffered resulting from
Respondent's unfair labor practices against her in
violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act. A
controversy having arisen over the amount due
under the terms of the Order, the Regional Direc-
tor for Region 5, on 24 August 1982, issued and
served on Respondent a backpay specification and
notice of hearing setting forth the backpay and re-
imbursement due under the Board's Order. Re-
spondent failed to file an answer to the specifica-
tion.
By letter dated 16 September 1982 the Regional
Director informed Respondent that it had not filed
an answer, and that failing receipt of an answer by
23 September 1982 a Motion for Summary Judg-
ment would be filed. By letter dated 12 October
1982 counsel for the General Counsel again in-
formed Respondent that no answer to the specifica-
tion had been received. Finally, by letter dated 21
October 1982 counsel for the General Counsel in-
formed Respondent that, since no answer had been
filed within 15 days of the date that the specifica-
tion issued, she would move for summary judg-
ment. No answer was filed.
On 24 November 1982 counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a Motion for
Summary Judgment. Subsequently, on 1 December
1982 the Board issued an order transferring the
proceeding to the Board and a Notice To Show
Cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment should not be granted. Respondent
has not filed a response to the Notice To Show
Cause.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following:
I Not reported in volumes of Board Decisions.
267 NLRB No. 81
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.54(c) of the Board's Rules and Regu-
lations, Series 8, as amended, provides in relevant
part with respect to a backpay specification:
(c) Effect of failure to answer or to plead spe-
cifically and in detail to the specification.-If the
respondent fails to file any answer to the speci-
fication within the time prescribed by this sec-
tion, the Board may, either with or without
taking evidence in support of the allegations of
the specification and without notice to the re-
spondent, find the specification to be true and
enter such order as may be appropriate.
The backpay specification duly served on Re-
spondent specifically states that, pursuant to Sec-
tion 102.54 of the Board's Rules and Regulations,
Series 8, as amended, Respondent shall, within 15
days from the date of the specification, file with
the Regional Director an original and four copies
of an answer to the specification. To the extent
that such answer fails to deny the allegations of the
specification in the manner required under the
Board's Rules and Regulations and the failure to do
so is not adequately explained, such allegations
shall be deemed to be admitted to be true and Re-
spondent shall be precluded from introducing any
evidence controverting them. According to the un-
controverted allegations of the Motion for Summa-
ry Judgment, Respondent, by letters dated 16 Sep-
tember and 12 October 1982, was informed of the
requirement to file an answer to the specification
and that the General Counsel would move for sum-
mary judgment if no answer was filed. Again on 21
October 1982 Respondent was informed by certi-
fied mail that, since no answer was filed, the Gen-
eral Counsel would move for summary judgment. 2
As of 23 November 1982, the date of the Motion
for Summary Judgment, Respondent has not filed
an answer to the specification. Nor has it filed a re-
sponse to the Notice To Show Cause.
As Respondent has not filed an answer to the
specification or offered any explanation for its fail-
ure to do so, in accordance with the rule set forth
above, the Board deems Respondent to have admit-
ted all the allegations of the specification to be true
and there are no matters in issue requiring a hear-
ing. Accordingly, we grant the Motion for Summa-
ry Judgment. On the basis of the specification and
the entire record in this case, the Board makes the
following:
2 Copies of the letters and the return receipts are attached to the
Motion for Summary Judgment
486
ALPHA-X CORPORATION
FINDINGS OF FACT
We find that Patricia Williamson is entitled to be
made whole under the terms of the Board's Order
by the payment to her of the amount calculated in
the General Counsel's backpay specification;
namely, by payment to her of the amount of
$3,021.75, plus interest accrued to the date of pay-
ment, minus the tax withholdings as required by
Federal and state laws.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re-
lations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Alpha-X Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland, its of-
ficers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall make
whole Patricia Williamson by paying to her the
sum of $3,021.75, plus interest accrued to the date
of payment to be computed in the manner set forth
in Florida Steel Corp., 231 NLRB 651 (1977),3 less
withholdings required by Federal and state laws.
3 See, generally, Isis Plumbing Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962).
487