Clean and Shine

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 5, 1980

253 N.L.R.B. 610 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Clean and Shine and Union Trabajadores Indus-
triales de Puerto Rico. Case 24-CA-4341
December 5, 1980
I)ECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBI.RS JNKINS, P NI.I.O, ANI)
ZIMMERMAN
Upon a charge filed on June 27, 1980,' by Union
Trabajadores Industriales de Puerto Rico, herein
called the Union, and duly served on Clean and
Shine, herein called Respondent, the General
Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by
the Regional Director for Region 24, issued a com-
plaint on August 1, against Respondent, alleging
that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging
in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within
the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) and Section
2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act,
as amended. Copies of the charge and the com-
plaint and notice of hearing before an administra-
tive law judge were duly served on the parties to
this proceeding.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the
complaint alleges in substance that, on or about
May 19, Respondentdischarged employees Javier
and Estrella Ocasio and Samuel Rodriguez and has,
since then, refused to reinstate or offer to reinstate
said employees because of their membership in and
activities on behalf of the Union and because they
engaged in protected concerted activities. The
complaint further alleges that, on or about May 16,
Respondent unlawfully interrogated individual em-
ployees concerning their membership in and sup-
port for the Union; threatened, on that same day;
an employee with discharge if he continued his
membership in and support for the Union; prohibit-
ed an employee from entering into a restaurant
complex, known as "La Terraza," where Respond-
ent's office is located, solely because of that em-
ployee's membership in and activities on behalf of
the Union; and, during that same incident, in-
formed another employer, known as "Delicioso,"
that said employee should not be hired because of
his activities on behalf of and membership in the
Union. Respondent has failed to file an answer to
the complaint and, therefore, these allegations
stand uncontroverted.
On September 3, counsel for the General Coun-
sel filed directly with the Board a "Motion for
Summary Judgment for Failure To File Answer"
and a petition in support thereof, with exhibits at-
tached. Subsequently, on September 5, the Board
issued an order transferring the proceeding to the
' All dale, hercinafter arc in 1980, unless otherwise indicated
Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the Gen-
eral 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 the 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 allegations in the complaint, if no answer
is filed, or any allegation in the complaint not
specifically denied or explained in an answer
filed, unless the respondent shall state in the
answer that he is without knowledge, 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 specifically states that unless an answer
to the complaint is filed by Respondent within 10
days of service thereof, "all of the allegations in
the complaint shall be deemed to be admitted by it
to be true and may be so found by the Board."
Furthermore, according to General Counsel's Ex-
hibit E, on August 18 the Regional Director for
Region 24 sent a letter to Respondent informing it
that an answer to the complaint had not yet been
received and further advising it that unless an
answer to the complaint was received by August
26, counsel for the General Counsel would move
for summary judgment. No answer was received
from Respondent by August 26, or by September
3, the date the Motion for Summary Judgment was
filed. No good cause for failure to file an answer
having been shown, in accordance with the rule set
forth above, the allegations of the complaint are
deemed to be admitted as true. Accordingly, we
find to be true all the allegations of the complaint
and, furthermore, hereby grant the General Coun-
sel's Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the basis of the entire record, the Board
makes the following:
253 NLRB No. 90
610
CLFAN ANt) SHINE
FINIIN(S OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS O RESPONI)LNT
Respondent, a Puerto Rico corporation, is en-
gaged in the business of providing janitorial serv-
ices and maintains an office and place of business in
"La Terraza" restaurant complex situated in the
Plaza Las Americas shopping center in Hato Rey,
Puerto Rico. During the past calendar year, which
period is representative of its annual operations
generally, Respondent, during the course and con-
duct of its business, provided janitorial services
valued in excess of $50,000 for Plaza Las Americas,
Inc., a corporation which is engaged directly in in-
terstate commerce.
On the basis of the foregoing, we find 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.
II. I HEI LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOl.VEI)
Union Trabajadores Industriales de Puerto Rico
is a labor organization within the meaning of Sec-
tion 2(5) of the Act.
lIt. THE NFAIR ABOR PRACTICES
A. The 8(a)(3) and (1) Violations
On or about May 19, Respondent discharged em-
ployees Ocasio and Rodriguez and has, since then,
refused and continues to refuse to reinstate said em-
ployees because of their membership in and activi-
ties on behalf of the Union and because they en-
gaged in other concerted activities for the purpose
of collective bargaining and other mutual aid and
protection.
We find that by engaging in the above-described
conduct. Respondent has discriminated, and contin-
ues to discriminate, against Ocasio and Rodriguez
in regard to their hire or tenure of employment in
order to discourage union or other protected con-
certed activities and that by so doing Respondent
has engaged in, and is engaging in, unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and
(I) of the Act.
B. The 8(a)(1) Violations
In addition to the conduct described above in
section 111, A, Respondent, through its supervisor,
Luis Font, committed the following acts:
I. On or about May 16, it interrogated individual
employees concerning their membership in and ac-
tivities on behalf of the Union.
2. On or about the same day, Respondent threat-
ened an employee with discharge if said employee
continued his membership in and support for the
Union.
3. On or about June 2 or 3, Respondent prohibit-
ed an employee of Plaza Las Americas, Inc., from
entering into the public area of "La Terraza" res-
taurant complex and, in the course of this incident,
informed Manolo Navarro, supervisor of the "Deli-
cioso" restaurant which is situated in the restaurant
complex, that said employee should not be hired
because of his membership in and support for the
Union.
We find that by engaging in the conduct de-
scribed above Respondent has interfered with, re-
strained, and coerced, and is interfering with, re-
straining, and coercing its employees in the exer-
cise of the rights guaranted them by Section 7 of
the Act. Accordingly, we find that Respondent has
thereby engaged in, and is engaging in, unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of
the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR I ABOR
PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent set forth in section
III, above, occurring in connection with its oper-
ations as described in section 1, above, have a
close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade,
traffic, and commerce among the several States and
tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and ob-
structing commerce and the free flow of conm-
merce.
CONCI.USIONS OF LAW
I. Clean and Shine is an employer engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and
(7) of the Act.
2. Union Trabajadores Industriales de Puerto
Rico is a labor organization within the meaning of
Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. By discharging employees Javier Estrella
Ocasio and Samuel Rodriguez because they were
members of, or engaged in activities in support of,
the Union, and because they engaged in other pro-
tected concerted activity for their mutual aid and
protection, Respondent violated Section 8(a)(3) and
(1) of the Act.
4. By the acts described in section II B. above.
Respondent did interfere with, restrain, and coerce,
and is interfering with, restraining, and coercing.
employees in the exercise of their Section 7 rights.
and thereby did engaged in, and is engaging in,
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(1) of the Act.
611]
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 2(6)
and (7) of the Act.
THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent engaged in and is
engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act, we shall
order that it cease and desist therefrom, and take
certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the
policies of the Act.
Respondent shall be ordered to offer employees
Javier Estrella Ocasio and Samuel Rodriguez full
and immediate reinstatement to their former jobs
or, if such jobs no longer exist, to substantially
equivalent jobs, without prejudice to their seniority
or other rights and privileges previously enjoyed,
and make them whole for any loss of pay they may
have suffered by reason of the discrimination
against them from the date of their discharge to the
date of Respondent's offer of reinstatement. Back-
pay is to be paid in accordance with the formula
prescribed in F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB
289 (1950), with with interest to be computed in
the manner prescribed in Florida Steel Corporation,
231 NLRB 651 (1977).2
Respondent shall further be ordered to cease and
desist from in any like or related manner interfer-
ing with, restraining, or coercing its employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Sec-
tion 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,
Clean And Shine, Hato Rey, Puerto Rico, its offi-
cers, agents. successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Discharging employees because they are
members of, or engaged in activities on behalf of,
Union Trabajadores Industriales de Puerto Rico, or
because they engaged in other protected concerted
activities.
(b) Threatening its employees with discharge be-
cause of their continued membership in and sup-
port for the above-mentioned Union.
(c) Interrogating its employees concerning their
membership in and activities on behalf of the
Union.
(d) Prohibiting employees from entering into
public areas and attempting to have employees
blacklisted because they were members of, or en-
gaged in activities on behalf of, the Union.
See, generally. Ils Plumbing & Ieauing Co., 138 NLRB 16 (1962).
(e) In any like or related manner interfering
with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7
of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action to effec-
tuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Offer employee Javier Estrella Ocasio and
Samuel Rodriguez full and immediate reinstatement
to their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer
exist, to substantially equivalent jobs, without prej-
udice to their seniority or other rights and prvi-
leges previously enjoyed, and make them whole for
any loss of pay they may have suffered by reason
of the discrimination against them in the manner
set forth in the section of this Decision entitled
"The Remedy."
(b) Preserve and, upon request, make available to
the Board or its agents, for examination and copy-
ing, all payroll records, social security payment re-
cords, timecards, personnel records and reports,
and all other records necessary to analyze the
amount of backpay due under the terms of this
Order.
(c) Post at its Hato Rey, Puerto Rico, facility,
copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 3
Copies of said notice, prepared in both Spanish and
English, on forms provided by the Regional Direc-
tor for Region 24, after being duly signed by Re-
spondent's representative, shall be posted by it im-
mediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained
by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in con-
spicuous places, including all places where notices
to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable
steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that
said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by
any other material.
(d) Notify the Regional Director for Region 24,
in writing, within 20 days from the date of this
Order, what steps Respondent has taken to comply
herewith.
:' In the event that this Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by
Order of the National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursu-
ant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an
Order of the National Labor Relations Board*
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
The National Labor Relations Board has found
that we have violated the National Labor Relations
Act and has ordered us to post this notice.
612
CI.EAN ANI) SHINE
The Act gives employees the following rights:
To engage in self-organization
To form, join, or assist any union
To bargain collectively through repre-
sentatives of their own choice
To engage in activities together for the
purpose of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection
To refrain from the exercise of any or all
such activities.
WE Wl.L NOT discharge or discriminate
against any of our employees because of their
membership in or activities in support of
Union Trabajadores Industriales de Puerto
Rico, or any other labor organziation.
WE WILl. NOI threaten our employees with
discharge because they are members of and/or
have supported the above-mentioned Union or
any other labor organization.
WE Wll.!. NO'I interrogate our employees
concerning their activities on behalf of or
membership in the above, or any other, labor
organziation.
Wt. Will . NOt deny employees access to
"La Terraza" restaurant complex and wl.
winl. not attempt to blacklist employees by
telling other employers that said employees
should not be hired because of their member-
ship in and activities on behalf of the above
Union or any other labor organziation.
WE wll NOI ill ally like or related manner
interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employ-
ees in the exercise of the rights guarantee
them by Section 7 of the Act.
WE wii.i offer employees Javier Estrella
Ocasio and Samuel Rodriguez immediate and
full reinstatement to their former jobs or, if
those jobs no longer exist, to substantially
equivalent jobs, without prejudice to their se-
niority or other rights and privileges previous-
ly enjoyed, and WE wit i make them whole
for any loss of earnings they may have suf-
fered as a result of our discrimination against
them, with interest.
CLEAN ANI) SHINE
h13