Danielle Sportswear, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 28, 1982

261 N.L.R.B. 1469 (N.L.R.B. 1982)

DANIELLE SPORTSWEAR
Danielle Sportswear, Inc. and Upper South Depart-
ment, International Ladies' Garment Workers'
Union, Local No. 4, AFL-CIO. Case 5-CA-
13715
May 28, 1982
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN VAN DE WATER AND
MEMBERS FANNING AND HUNTER
Upon a charge filed on September 15, 1981, by
Upper South Department, International Ladies'
Garment Workers' Union, Local No. 4, AFL-CIO,
and duly served on Respondent, Danielle Sports-
wear, Inc., the General Counsel of the National
Labor Relations Board, by the Acting Regional Di-
rector for Region 5, issued a complaint and notice
of hearing on October 27, 1981, against Respond-
ent, alleging that Respondent 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 the complaint and notice of hearing
before an administrative law judge were duly
served on the parties to this proceeding.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the
complaint alleges in substance that commencing on
or about July 13, 1981, and at all times thereafter,
Respondent has refused, and continues to date to
refuse, to execute the collective-bargaining agree-
ment reached with the Union in June 1981, al-
though the Union requested it to do so on July 13,
1981, and has continued to request it to do so. Re-
spondent failed to file a timely answer to the com-
plaint.
On February 5, 1982, counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a motion to
transfer the case to and continue the proceeding
before the Board and a Motion for Summary Judg-
ment. Subsequently, on February 12, 1982, the
Board issued an order transferring the proceeding
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 and, there-
fore, the allegations in the Motion for Summary
Judgment stand uncontroverted.
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:
261 NLRB No. 192
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Rule 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides:
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 herein specifically states that unless an
answer to the complaint is filed within 10 days of
service thereof "all of the allegations in the Com-
plaint shall be deemed to be admitted true and may
be so found by the Board." As noted above, Re-
spondent has failed to file a timely answer to the
complaint and has further failed to file a response
to the Notice To Show Cause. According to the
Motion for Summary Judgment, on January 18,
1982, the General Counsel mailed a letter to Re-
spondent giving it until January 25, 1982, to file an
answer, and stating that failure to do so would
result in filing of a Motion for Summary Judgment.
On January 28, 1982, the Regional Office informed
Respondent by telephone and by letter that no
answer had been received, and that the instant
motion would be filed if an answer was not re-
ceived by February 3, 1982. No timely answer has
been filed. '
I Respondent's only response to the complaint is one letter to the Re-
gional Office dated February 8, 1982. In the letter Respondent contends
that, because it did not ship or purchase goods out-of-town, it is not sub-
ject to our junsdiction Insofar as this letter purports to be an answer to
the complaint, we find it is inadequate and does not comply with the re-
quirements of Sec. 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regulations in that it
does not specifically admit, deny, or explain each of the allegations of the
complaint.
Even assuming, arguendo, that Respondent's letter constitutes a proper
answer, it admits sufficient facts to establish jurisdiction, because it
merely denies that it shipped goods out-of-state or purchased goods from
out-of-state enterprises valued in excess of $50,000. In its letter Respond-
ent does not deny the allegations of the complaint that during the past 12
months it derived gross revenues in excess of S500,000, that it sold and
shipped from its Baltimore, Maryland, facility products, goods, and mate-
rials valued in excess of $50,000 directly to other enterprises located
within the State of Maryland, which in turn shipped said products,
goods, and materials to points outside the State of Maryland, or that it
received at its Baltimore, Maryland, facility products, goods, and materi-
als valued in excess of S50,000 from other enterprises located within the
State of Maryland, each of which other enterprises had received the said
products, goods, and materials directly from points outside the State of
Maryland.
1469
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, under the rule set forth above, no
good cause having been shown for the failure to
file a timely answer, the allegations of the com-
plaint are deemed admitted and are found to be
true, and we shall 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
Danielle Sportswear, Inc., maintains its office
and place of business in Baltimore, Maryland,
where it is engaged in the manufacture and sale of
women's sportswear. During the past 12 months, a
representative period, Respondent, in the course
and conduct of its business operations, derived
gross revenues in excess of $500,000. During that
same period Respondent sold and shipped from its
Baltimore, Maryland, facility products, goods, and
materials valued in excess of $50,000 directly to
points outside the State of Maryland or directly to
other enterprises located within the State of Mary-
land, which in turn shipped said products, goods,
and materials to points outside the State of Mary-
land. During that same period Respondent has pur-
chased and received at its Baltimore, Maryland, fa-
cility products, goods, and materials valued in
excess of $50,000 directly from points located out-
side the State of Maryland or from other enter-
prises located within the State of Maryland, each
of which enterprises had received the products,
goods, and materials directly from other points out-
side the State of Maryland.
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.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Upper South Department, International Ladies'
Garment Workers' Union, Local No. 4, AFL-CIO,
is a labor organization within the meaning of Sec-
tion 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
Respondent's Refusal To Bargain
Commencing on or about July 13, 1981, and at
all times thereafter, Respondent has refused, and
continues to date to refuse, to execute the collec-
tive-bargaining agreement reached during negotia-
tions between the parties hereto culminating in
June 1981, although the Union has requested and is
requesting it to do so.
Accordingly, we find that Respondent has, since
July 13, 1981, and at all times thereafter, refused to
bargain collectively with the Union as the exclu-
sive representative of the employees in the appro-
priate unit, and that, by such refusal, Respondent
has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices within the meaning of Section 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
that it take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
Having found that Respondent has failed and re-
fused to sign the collective-bargaining agreement
reached with the Union in June 1981, we shall
order that, upon request, Respondent sign said col-
lective-bargaining agreement forthwith. In addi-
tion, we shall order that Respondent give effect to
the terms of said agreement retroactive to its effec-
tive date, and make the unit employees whole for
any loss of pay or benefits they may have suffered
by reason of its failure to execute and sign the
aforesaid agreement, with interest thereon to be
computed in the manner prescribed in Isis Plumbing
& Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962), and Florida
Steel Corporation, 231 NLRB 651 (1977).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Danielle Sportswear, Inc., is an employer en-
gaged in commerce within the meaning of Section
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Upper South Department, International
Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, Local No. 4,
AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the mean-
ing of Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. All non-supervisory production, maintenance,
packing and shipping employees employed by the
Employer at its Baltimore, Maryland, facility, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purpose of collec-
1470
DANIELLE SPORTSWEAR
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b)
of the Act.
4. At all times material herein, the above-named
labor organization has been and now is the exclu-
sive representative of all employees in the aforesaid
unit for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act.
5. By refusing on or about July 13, 1981, and at
all times thereafter, to sign the collective-bargain-
ing agreement reached with the Union in June
1981, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(5) 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,
Danielle Sportswear, Inc., Baltimore, Maryland, its
officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to sign the collective-bargaining
agreement reached with Upper South Department,
International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union,
Local No. 4, AFL-CIO, in June 1981, covering
rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment for employees in the fol-
lowing appropriate unit:
All non-supervisory production, maintenance,
shipping and packing employees employed by
the Employer at its Baltimore, Maryland facili-
ty.
(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 ex-
ecute the collective-bargaining agreement reached
with the Union in June 1981.
(b) Give effect to the terms of the above-de-
scribed collective-bargaining agreement retroactive
to the effective date of such agreement, and make
the unit employees whole for any loss of pay or
benefits they may have suffered by reason of its
failure to execute and sign said agreement, with in-
terest thereon to be computed in the manner set
forth in the section of this Decision entitled "The
Remedy."
(c) Preserve and, upon request, make available to
the Board or its agents, for examination and copy-
ing, all payroll records, social security payment
records, timecards, personnel records and reports,
and all other records necessary to analyze the
amount of backpay due under the terms of this
Order.
(d) Post at its place of business in Baltimore,
Maryland, copies of the attached notice marked
"Appendix." 2 Copies of said notice, on forms pro-
vided by the Regional Director for Region 5, after
being duly signed by Respondent's representative,
shall be posted by Respondent immediately upon
receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 con-
secutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, in-
cluding all places where notices to employees are
customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken
by Respondent to ensure that said notices are not
altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(e) Notify the Regional Director for Region 5, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps have been taken to comply herewith.
2 In the esent 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 latxor Relations Board"
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT refuse to sign the collective-
bargaining agreement reached with Upper
South Department, International Ladies' Gar-
ment Workers' Union, Local No. 4, AFL-
CIO, in June 1981, covering rates of pay,
wages, hours, and other terms and conditions
of employment for employees in the bargain-
ing 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 in 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 execute the collec-
tive-bargaining agreement reached with the
above-named Union in June 1981.
1471
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WE WILL give effect to the terms of the
above-described collective-bargaining agree-
ment retroactive to the effective date of such
agreement, and make the unit employees
whole for any loss of pay or benefits they may
have suffered by reason of our failure to ex-
ecute and sign said agreement, together with
interest. The bargaining unit is:
All non-supervisory production, maintenance,
packing and shipping employees employed by
the Employer at its Baltimore, Maryland loca-
tion.
DANIELLE SPORTSWEAR, INC.
1472