Carrizo Manufacturing Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 28, 1976

225 N.L.R.B. 251 (N.L.R.B. 1976)

CARRIZO MANUFACTURING CO., INC. 251
Salant Corporation , d/b/a Carrizo Manufacturing
Co., Inc . and Obreros Unidos Independientes.
Cases 23-CA-4938-1 and 23-CA-4938-2
(a) . . . The respondent shall, within 15 days
from the service of the specification, if any, file
an answer thereto; . .. .
June 28, 1976
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
By MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, AND WALTHER
On October 22, 1974, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board issued a Decision and Order' adopting
the recommended Order of an Administrative Law
Judge, as modified, directing the Respondent, inter
alia, to make whole Pedro Patlan, Rebecca Patlan,
and Carlos D. Juarez, Jr., for any loss of pay they
may have suffered by reason of Respondent's dis-
crimination against them. On January 15, 1975, the
Board issued an Order 2 denying Respondent's Mo-
tion for Reconsideration of its earlier Decision and
Order. On September 4, 1975, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit handed
down its decision enforcing the backpay provisions
of the Board's Order.3 A controversy having arisen
over the amount of backpay due under the terms of
the Board's Order, the Regional Director for Region
23, on April 1, 1976, issued a backpay specification
and notice of hearing setting forth certain allegations
with respect to the amounts of backpay due the dis-
criminatees. The Respondent failed to file an answer
to the specification.
On April 26, 1976, counsel for the General Coun-
sel filed a Motion for Default Judgment directly with
the Board. The Board, on May 4, 1976, issued an
order transferring the proceeding to the Board and a
Notice to Show Cause why the General Counsel's
motion should not be granted. The Respondent
failed to file 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:
Ruling on the Motion for Default Judgment
Section 102.54 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides, in pertinent
part, as follows:
1214 NLRB 171
2 216 NLRB 170
526 F 2d 585
(c) . . . If the respondent fails to file any answer
to the specification within the time prescribed
by this section, the Board may, either with or
without taking evidence in support of the allega-
tions of the specification and without notice to
the respondent, find the specification to be true
and enter such order as may be appropriate.
The backpay specification, issued on April 1, 1976,
and served on Respondent by registered mail, states
that Respondent shall, within 15 days from the date
of the specification, file an answer to the specifica-
tion with the Regional Director for Region 23, and
that, to the extent the answer fails to deny 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 true and Respondent shall be pre-
cluded from introducing any evidence controverting
them.
According to the uncontroverted Motion for De-
fault Judgment, filed April 26, 1976, counsel for the
General Counsel's telephone messages left for
Respondent's attorney who was served with a copy
of the specification on April 5, 1976, were not an-
swered or returned, and Respondent has failed to file
an answer to the specification although the time
within which to file an answer has expired. Further,
as noted above, Respondent has failed to file a re-
sponse to the Notice To Show Cause. As Respondent
has not filed an answer, or offered a satisfactory ex-
planation for its failure to do so, the allegations of
the specification are, in accordance with the rule set
forth above, found to be true.
Accordingly, on the basis of the allegations of the
specification which are accepted as true, the Board
concludes that the net backpay due each discrimina-
tee is as stated in the computations of the specifica-
tion, and hereinafter orders that payment thereof be
made by Respondent to the discriminatees named
below.
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, Sa-
lant Corporation, d/b/a Carrizo Manufacturing Co.,
Inc., Carrizo Springs, Texas, its officers, agents, suc-
cessors, and assigns, shall make whole each of the
225 NLRB No. 47
252 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
discriminatees named below by payment to each of pay due is paid, less the tax withholding required by
them the amount set forth adjacent to his or her Federal and state laws:
name, plus interest accrued at the rate of 6 percent
per annum in the manner prescribed in Isis Plumbing
& Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962), until all back-
Pedro Patlan $2,961
Carlos D. Juarez , Jr. 3,157
Rebecca Patlan 2,878