Cyntell Tool Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 11, 1972196 N.L.R.B. 1032 (N.L.R.B. 1972) Copy Citation 1032 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Cyntell Tool Company and International Union, United Automobile , Aerospace and Agricultural Im- plement Workers of America (UAW). Case 7-CA- 8753 May 11, 1972 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND KENNEDY Upon a charge filed on June 3, 1971, by the Inter- national Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), herein called the Union, and duly served on the Cyn- tell Tool Company, herein called the Respondent, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 7, issued a complaint on August 17, 1971,' against Respondent, alleging that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge, complaint, and notice of hearing before a Trial Examiner were duly served on the parties to this proceeding. In substance, the complaint alleges that the Respondent's conduct at its Melvindale, Michigan, plant violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. The specific allegations of conduct, occurring between December 3, 1970, and May 14, 1971, are: (1) threatening em- ployees with plant closure because of their union ac- tivities, sympathies, and desires; (2) coercively interrogating employees concerning their union activ- ities, sympathies, and desires; (3) creating the impres- sion of surveillance of the employees' protected concerted activities by advising them it knew who had voted for the Union and against it; (4) distributing a campaign letter to create the impression that the em- ployees' efforts to seek representation by the Union were futile and detrimental to them; (5) threatening employees with adverse working conditions because of their union activities, sympathies, and desires; (6) reprimanding employees because of their conversa- tions concerning the Union; and (7) threatening em- ployees with discharge and adverse personnel action because of their union activities, sympathies, and de- sires. The Respondent filed its answer on August 19, 1971, denying the alleged violations of Section 8(a)(1) and their connection with interstate commerce under Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. Then, on January 13, 1 The Motion for Summary Judgment inadvertently gives this date as August 7, 1971. 1972, the Respondent withdrew its answer to the com- plaint. Following this withdrawal, counsel for the General Counsel moved for summary judgment, arguing that the allegations should be deemed admitted under Sec- tion 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regulations. Subsequently, the proceeding was transferred to the Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment should not be granted was issued by the Board. The Respondent did not respond to the notice. However, the Union did file a response in which it argued for a remedy in addition to that requested by the General Counsel. 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 Rules and Regulations requires that the Respondent file an answer within 10 days of service of the complaint, and if no answer is filed, the allegations in the complaint will be deemed admitted as true, unless good cause to the contrary is shown. The Respondent's answer here was filed on August 19, 1971, 2 days after the complaint was filed and well within the 10-day period. The allegations of the complaint were denied or admitted with the re- quired specificity. However, the Respondent subse- quently withdrew its answer without giving any reason. The withdrawal of an answer of necessity has the same effect as a failure to file, and thus the allega- tions of the complaint must be deemed admitted as true 2 as if no answer had ever been filed. As there is an absence of any showing or good cause to the con- trary, and in accordance with the provisions of Sec- tion 102.20, the allegations of the complaint are found to be true. On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT The Respondent is a Michigan corporation en- gaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of tools, fixtures, special machinery, and related prod- ucts at its principal office and place of business, 17950 2 Hermann Equipment Manufacturing Company, Inc., 156 NLRB 716, 718 (1966); Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers Local Union 215, Intl. Brthd of Teamsters (The Bedford-Nugent Corp.), 137 NLRB 573, 574 (1962); accord, Truck Drivers Local No. 696 (Freeto Construction Co., Inc.), 149 NLRB 23, 24, in. 2 (1962) (denials of knowledge of allegations withdrawn). 196 NLRB No. 150 CYNTELL TOOL COMPANY Allen Road, Melvindale, Michigan. In the course and conduct of its business during 1970, a representative period, the Respondent purchased and received steel, tools, and other goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 at its plant from points outside the State of Michigan, and shipped products valued in excess of $50,000 to points outside the State of Michigan. We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Respon- dent 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 effectu- ate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED International Union, United Automobile, Aero- space and Agricultural Implement Workers of Ameri- ca (UAW), is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 8(a)(1) At various times between December 3, 1970, and May 14, 1971, the Respondent by its agent, William Bernath, (1) threatened employees with plant closure because of their union activities, sympathies, and de- sires ; (2) coercively interrogated employees concern- ing their union activities, sympathies, and desires; (3) created the impression of surveillance of the employ- ees' protected concerted activities by advising them it knew who had voted for the Union, and against it; (4) distributing a letter to create the impression that the employees' efforts to seek representation by the Un- ion were futile and detrimental to them; (5) threat- ened employees with adverse working conditions because of their union activities, sympathies, and de- sires ; (6) reprimanded employees because of their conversations concerning the Union; and (7) threat- ened employees with discharge or adverse personnel action because of their union activities, sympathies, and desires. We find that by this conduct the Respon- dent interfered with, restrained, and coerced its em- ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed under Section 7 of the Act. By this conduct the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III, above, occurring in connection with its operations described in section I, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and com- merce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY 1033 Having found that the Respondent has been en- gaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1), we shall order that it cease and desist from that conduct and take certain affirmative action designed to effect the policies of the Act, as ordered below. In addition to the above, the Union requests an expanded remedy providing for (1) reading of the appropriate notice to all employees assembled on company premises during company time by the Re- spondent or Board agent; (2) mailing a copy of the appropriate notice to each employee at company ex- pense; and (3) upon request of the Union and its representatives, reasonable access, for a 6-month peri- od, to Respondent's bulletin boards and all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. In support of this request, the Union argues that a prior notice posted to a settlement agreement of an earlier unfair labor practice complaint covered "al- most the same sort of" employer conduct and that the same notice, thus, would not be effective. We do not believe that the unfair labor practices involved here require such extraordinary remedy. H. W. Elson Bottling Company, 155 NLRB 714 (1965), and The Loray Corporation, 184 NLRB No. 57 (1970), cited in support of additional remedy, are not rele- vant. In those cases the Board was concerned with "outrageous" conduct by employers that prevented unions from attaining majority status to the destruc- tion of employee rights. Here there has been no such showing, and the present case is the first in which the Respondent has actually been found guilty by the Board of violating the Act. Moreover, unlike the prior settlement agreement, the present Decision and Order is enforceable by court order, if necessary, and subse- quent contempt proceedings, if appropriate. The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts and the entire record, makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Respondent, Cyntell Tool Company, is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. International Union, United Automobile, Aero- space and Agricultural Implement Workers of Ameri- ca (UAW), is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. By the acts enumerated in section III, the Re- spondent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act and by those acts has been en- 1034 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD gaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of what steps have been taken to comply herewith. Section 8(a)(I) of the Act. 4. 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 Rela- tions Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Cyn- tell Tool Company, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Threatening employees with plant closure be- cause of their union activities, sympathies, and de- sires. (b) Coercively interrogating employees concerning their union activities, sympathies, and desires. (c) Creating the impression of engaging in surveil- lance of the employees' protected concerted activities by advising them it knows who had voted for the Union and against it. (d) Distributing a campaign letter to create the im- pression that the employees' efforts to seek represent- ation by the Union were futile and detrimental to them. (e) Threatening employees with adverse working conditions because of their union activities, sympa- thies, and desires. (f) Reprimanding employees because of their con- versations concerning the Union. (g) Threatening employees with discharge and ad- verse personnel action because of their union activi- ties, sympathies, and desires. (h) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise 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) Post at its Melvindale, Michigan, plant copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix."3 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Direc- tor for Region 7, after being duly signed by Respondent's representative, shall be posted by Re- spondent 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 Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (b) Notify the Regional Director for Region 7, in 3 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 be changed to read "Posted Pursuant 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 Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, we here- by notify our employees that: WE WILL NOT threaten employees with plant closure because of their union activities, sympa- thies, and desires. WE WILL NOT coercively interrogate employees concerning their union activities, sympathies, and desires. WE WILL NOT create the impression of engaging in surveillance of the employees' protected con- certed activities by advising them we know who voted for the Union and against it. WE WILL NOT distribute a campaign letter to create the impression that the employees' efforts to seek representation by the Union are futile and detrimental to them. WE WILL NOT threaten employees with adverse working conditions because of their union activi- ties, sympathies, and desires. WE WILL NOT reprimand employees because of their conversations concerning the Union. WE WILL NOT threaten employees with dis- charge and adverse personnel action because of their union activities, sympathies, and desires. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner in- terfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act. CYNTELL TOOL COMPANY (Employer) Dated By (Representative) (Title) This is an official notice and must not be defaced writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, by anyone. CYNTELL TOOL COMPANY 1035 This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive ance with its provisions may be directed to the days from the date of posting and must net be altered, Board's Office, 500 Book Building, 1249 Washington defaced, or covered by any other material. Boulevard, Detroit, Michigan 48226, Telephone 313- Any questions concerning this notice or compli- 226-3200. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation