Comau, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Mar 9, 2011

07-RD-003644 (N.L.R.B. Mar. 9, 2011)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
COMAU, INC.
Employer
and Case 7-RD-3644
WILLIE RUSHING
Petitioner
and
AUTOMATED SYSTEMS WORKERS LOCAL 1123,
A DIVISION OF MICHIGAN REGIONAL COUNCIL
OF CARPENTERS, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF
CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA
Union
and
COMAU EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (CEA)
Intervenor
ORDER
The Employer’s, the Petitioner’s, and the Intervenor’s Requests for Review of the
Regional Director’s Decision and Order dismissing the petition are denied as they raise
no substantial issues warranting reversal of the Regional Director’s action. In Comau,
Inc., 356 NLRB No. 21 (November 5, 2010), the Board found that the Employer violated
Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act by unilaterally implementing a health insurance plan in
the absence of an agreement or bona fide impasse. The Board imposed, inter alia, an
affirmative bargaining order remedy for the Employer’s unilateral change violation. An
affirmative bargaining order precludes the question concerning representation raised by
the petition and requires that the petition be dismissed.1 NLRB Casehandling Manual,

1 An affirmative bargaining order necessarily precludes the question concerning representation raised by
the petition, as processing the petition would be inconsistent with the Employer’s bargaining obligation.
Big Three Industries, 201 NLRB 197 (1973); Brannan Sand & Gravel, 308 NLRB 922 (1992); BOC Group,
323 NLRB 1100 (1997); NLRB Casehandling Manual, Part Two, Representation Proceedings Sec.
11730.3(b).
Part Two, Representation Proceedings, Sec. 11733.2(a)(2).2 Accordingly, the dismissal
of the petition is affirmed.3
WILMA B. LIEBMAN, CHAIRMAN
CRAIG BECKER, MEMBER
MARK GASTON PEARCE, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., March 9, 2011.

2 We therefore find it unnecessary to rely on the Regional Director’s finding that there was a causal
relationship between the Employer’s unlawful unilateral implementation of a new health care plan and the
decertification petition under Master Slack, 271 NLRB 78 (1984).
3 The petition is subject to reinstatement, if appropriate, after final disposition of the unfair labor practice
proceeding in Case 7-CA-52106. Accordingly, the Petitioner is made a party in interest to Case 7-CA-
52106 solely for the purpose of receiving notification of the final outcome of that case. See generally,
NLRB Casehandling Manual, Part Two, Representation Proceedings, Sec. 11733.2(b).