Chinook Motel

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 9, 1981

253 N.L.R.B. 1197 (N.L.R.B. 1981)

CHINOOK MOTEL
Rental Properties of Tacoma, Inc., d/b/a Chinook
Motel and Culinary Workers, Hotel and Motel
Employees and Beverage Dispensers, Local 417,
AFL-CIO. Case 19-CA-12561
January 9, 1981
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, AND
TRUESDALE
Upon a charge filed on June 27, 1980,1 by Culi-
nary Workers, Hotel and Motel Employees and
Beverage Dispensers, Local 417, AFL-CIO, herein
called the Union, and duly served on Rental Prop-
erties of Tacoma, Inc., d/b/a Chinook Motel,
herein called Respondent, the General Counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board, by the Re-
gional Director for Region 19, issued a complaint
on July 21, against Respondent, alleging that Re-
spondent had engaged in and was engaging in
unfair labor practices affecting commerce within
the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section
2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act,
as amended. Copies of the charge and complaint
and notice of hearing before an administrative law
judge were duly served on the parties to this pro-
ceeding. Respondent failed to file an answer to the
complaint.
On October 27, 1980, counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a Motion for
Summary Judgment. Subsequently, on October 31,
the Board issued an order transferring the proceed-
ing to the Board and a Notice To Show Cause
why the General Counsel's Motion for Summary
Judgment should not be granted. Respondent did
not 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 Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides as follows:
The respondent shall, within 10 days from the
service of the complaint, file an answer there-
to. The respondent shall specifically admit,
deny, or explain each of the facts alleged in
the complaint, unless the respondent is without
knowledge, in which case the respondent shall
so state, such statement operating as a denial.
All the allegations in the complaint, if no
i All dates herein are in 1980 unless otherwise indicated.
answer is filed, or any allegation in the com-
plaint not specifically denied or explained in
an answer filed, unless the respondent shall
state in the answer that he is without knowl-
edge, shall be deemed to be admitted to be
true and shall be so found by the Board, unless
good cause to the contrary is shown.
The complaint and notice of hearing served on
Respondent herein specifically states that unless an
answer to the complaint is filed within 10 days of
service thereof "all of the allegations in said Com-
plaint shall be deemed to be admitted to be true
and may be so found by the Board." Further, ac-
cording to the uncontroverted allegations of the
Motion for Summary Judgment, Respondent was
notified by telephone on August 6 of the need to
file an answer to the complaint. By letter dated Oc-
tober 1, without Respondent's having asked leave
to do so, Respondent was informed that its time for
answering the complaint had been extended to Oc-
tober 9. No answer was received by October 9.
Respondent was advised, on October 16, by tele-
phone, and October 18, by telegram, that summary
judgment would be sought if it failed to file an
answer. Respondent has not filed an answer to the
complaint or, as noted, a response to the Notice To
Show Cause.
Accordingly, under the rule set forth above, no
good cause having been shown for the failure to
file an answer, the allegations of the complaint are
deemed admitted and are found to be true and we
grant the General Counsel's Motion for Summary
Judgment.
On the basis of the entire record, the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT
Respondent is a Washington corporation with its
principal place of business located in Tacoma,
Washington, where it is engaged in the business of
purchasing, selling, and operating hotels and motels
in various cities, including operating the Chinook
Motel in Port Angeles, Washington. During the
year preceding issuance of the complaint, a repre-
sentative period, Respondent, in the course and
conduct of its business operation, had gross sales of
goods and services valued in excess of $500,000.
During the same period, Respondent purchased
and caused to be transferred and delivered to its
facilities within the States of Washington and Mon-
tana goods and materials valued in excess of
$50,000 directly from sources outside said States,
or from suppliers within said States which in turn
253 NLRB No. 156
1197
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
obtained such goods and materials directly from
sources outside said States.
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Re-
spondent is, and has been at all times material
herein, an employer engaged in commerce within
the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and
that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to
assert jurisdiction herein.
1l. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Culinary Workers, Hotel and Motel Employees
and Beverage Dispensers, Local 417, AFL-CIO, is
a labor organization within the meaning of Section
2(5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Unit
The following employees of Respondent consti-
tute a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining
purposes within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the
Act:
All maids and laundry room workers em-
ployed by Respondent at its facilities located
in Port Angeles, Washington, excluding all
professional employees, guards, and supervi-
sors as defined in the Act.
B. Representative Status of the Union
The Union has been the collective-bargaining
representative of the employees in the above-de-
scribed unit since September 19, 1979, when it was
certified by the Board's Regional Director for
Region 19 following a secret-ballot election, and
the Union continues to be such exclusive repre-
sentative within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the
Act.
C. The Request To Bargain and Respondent's
Refusal
Commencing during or about early March 1980,
and at all times thereafter, the Union has requested
Respondent to bargain collectively with it as the
exclusive collective-bargaining representative of all
the employees in the above-described unit. Com-
mencing during or about early March 1980, and
continuing at all times thereafter to date, Respond-
ent has refused, and continues to refuse, to recog-
nize and bargain with the Union as the exclusive
representative for collective bargaining of all em-
ployees in said unit.
Accordingly, we find that, by the aforesaid con-
duct, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR
PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent set forth in section
III, above, occurring in connection with its oper-
ations described in section I, above, have a close,
intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traf-
fic, and commerce among the several States and
tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and ob-
structing commerce and the free flow of com-
merce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we
shall order that it cease and desist therefrom, and,
upon request, bargain collectively with the Union
as the exclusive representative of all employees in
the appropriate unit and, if an understanding is
reached, embody such understanding in a signed
agreement.
In order to insure that the employees in the ap-
propriate unit will be accorded the services of their
selected bargaining agent for the period provided
by law, we shall construe the initial period of certi-
fication as beginning on the date Respondent com-
mences to bargain in good faith with the Union as
the recognized bargaining representative in the ap-
propriate unit. See Mar-Jac Poultry Company, Inc.,
136 NLRB 785 (1962); Commerce Company d/b/a
Lamar Hotel, 140 NLRB 226, 229 (1962), enfd. 328
F.2d 600 (5th Cir. 1964), cert. denied 379 U.S. 817;
Burnett Construction Company, 149 NLRB 1419,
1421 (1964), enfd. 350 F.2d 57 (19th Cir. 1965).
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Rental Properties of Tacoma, Inc., d/b/a Chi-
nook Motel, is an employer engaged in commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the
Act.
2. Culinary Workers, Hotel and Motel Employ-
ees and Beverage Dispensers, Local 417, AFL-
CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of
Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. All maids and laundry room workers em-
ployed by Respondent at is facilities located in Port
Angeles, Washington, excluding all professional
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9(b) of the Act.
4. Since September 19, 1979, the above-named
labor organization has been and now is the certified
1198
CHINOOK MOTEL
and exclusive representative of all employees in the
aforesaid appropriate unit for the purpose of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a)
of the Act.
5. By refusing during or about early March 1980,
and at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively
with the above-named labor organization as the ex-
clusive bargaining representative of all the employ-
ees of Respondent in the appropriate unit, Re-
spondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(a)(5) of the Act.
6. By the aforesaid refusal to bargain, Respond-
ent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced and
is interfering with, restraining, and coercing, em-
ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
them in Section 7 of the Act, and thereby has en-
gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(l) of the Act.
7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
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,
Rental Properties of Tacoma, Inc., d/b/a Chinook
Motel, Tacoma, Washington, its officers, agents,
successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning
rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment with Culinary Workers,
Hotel and Motel Employees and Beverage Dis-
pensers, Local 417, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive
bargaining representative of its employees in the
following appropriate unit:
All maids and laundry room workers em-
ployed by Respondent at its facilities located
in Port Angeles, Washington, excluding all
professional employees, guards, and supervi-
sors as defined in the Act.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering
with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of
the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which
the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the
Act:
(a) Upon request, bargain with the above-named
labor organization as the exclusive representative
of all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit
with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and
other terms and conditions of employment, and, if
an understanding is reached, embody such under-
standing in a signed agreement.
(b) Post at its Port Angeles, Washington, facili-
ties copies of the attached notice marked "Appen-
dix." 2 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by
the Regional Director for Region 19, after being
duly signed by Respondent's representative, shall
be posted by Respondent immediately upon receipt
thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive
days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all
places where notices to employees are customarily
posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Re-
spondent to insure that said notices are not altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 19,
in writing, within 20 days from the date of this
Order, what steps have been taken to comply here-
with.
In the event that this Order is enforced hy a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by
Order of the National Labor Relations Hoard" shall read "Posled Pursu-
ant to a Judgment of the !llited States Court of Appeals Eniforcing an
Order of the National abor Relations Hoard
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAI. LABOR REIATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WII. NOT refuse to bargain collectively
concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and
other terms and conditions of employment
with Culinary Workers, Hotel and Motel Em-
ployees and Beverage Dispensers, Local 417,
AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of
the employees in the bargaining unit described
below.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner
interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employ-
ees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
them by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, upon request, bargain with the
above-named Union, as the exclusive repre-
sentative of all employees in the bargaining
unit described below, with respect to rates of
pay, wages, hours, and other terms and condi-
tions of employment, and, if an understanding
is reached, embody such understanding in a
signed agreement. The bargaining unit is:
1199
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
All maids and laundry room workers em-
ployed by us at our facilities located in Port
Angeles, Washington, excluding all profes-
sional employees, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
RENTAL PROPERTIES OF TACOMA,
INC., D/B/A CHINOOK MOTEL
1200