Dee Cee Floor Covering, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 15, 1979

244 N.L.R.B. 239 (N.L.R.B. 1979)

DEE ('EE FLOOR COVERING INC
Dee Cee Floor Covering, Inc. and its alter ego and/or
successor, Dagin-Akrab Floor Covering, Inc. and
Resilient Floor & Decorative Covering Workers Lo-
cal Union No. 1179, affiliated with International
Brotherhood of Painters & Allied Trades, AFL-
C!O. Case 17 CA-6809
August 15, 1979
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS PENELI.O
AND MURPHY
On September 27, 1977. the National Labor Rela-
tions Board issued its Decision and Order in the
above-entitled proceeding' in which it ordered that
Respondent, inter alia, make whole employees Fred
Wakefield, Gary Allen, and any other employees 2 for
losses sustained resulting from their refusal to accept
Respondent's unlawful offers of employment which,
the Board found, violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of
the Act. On May 26, 1978, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Tenth Circuit entered its judgment
enforcing the Board's Order. A controversy having
arisen over the amount of backpay owed the discrim-
inatees, the Regional Director for Region 17 duly is-
sued and served on the parties, including Respondent,
the backpay specification and notice of hearing
herein which sets forth the amounts of backpay alleg-
edly due the discriminatees. Respondent having failed
to answer the backpay specification the allegations set
forth therein stand uncontroverted.
On June 11, 1979, counsel for the General Counsel
filed with the Board a "Motion for Summary Judg-
ment and for Issuance of Board Order." Subse-
quently, on June 15, 1979, 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.' Re-
spondent has not filed 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.
' 232 NLRB 421.
2 In its Order the Board left to the compliance stage of this proceeding the
determination of whether other employees similarly rejected offers of em-
ployment which were unlawfully conditioned upon withdrawal from the
Union. During an investigation conducted during the compliance stage it
was revealed that another employee, Edwin Lee Hogan. refused to accept
employment with Respondent under these terms. Accordingly. he is alleged
by the General Counsel to be a discriminatee and entitled to backpa) as set
forth in the backpay specification mentioned herein.
I The Board also ordered the hearing postponed indefinitel).
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following:
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.54(c) of the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations. Series 8. as amended.
provides, in relevant part, with respect to a backpay
specification:
(c) Effect of fi/ilure to answer or plead specifi-
cal/ and in detail lo the specification. -- If the re-
spondent fails to file any answer to the specifica-
tion within the time prescribed by this section.
the Board may, either with or without taking evi-
dence in support of the allegations of the specifi-
cation and without notice to the respondent. find
the specification to be true and enter such order
as maN be appropriate.
The backpay specification duly served on Respon-
dent stated that Respondent should file with the Re-
gional Director an answer to said specification within
15 days after being served with the specification. Re-
spondent did not file an answer to the backpay speci-
fication and has not filed a response to the Notice To
Show Cause. No good cause to the contrary having
been shown in accordance with the above-mentioned
rule, the Board deems Respondent to have admitted
all allegations of the backpay specification to be true
and finds that there are no matters in issue which
would require a hearing. Accordingly, we hereby
grant the General Counsel's Motion for Summary
Judgment and shall issue an appropriate Order.
On the basis of the backpay specification and the
entire record in this case, the Board makes the follow-
ing findings of fact:
We find that Fred Wakefield. Gary Allen, and Ed-
win Lee Hogan are entitled to be made whole under
the Board's Order and the court's decree by payment
to them of the amounts as summarized and calculated
in the General Counsel's backpay specification:
namely, by payment of $9,461.21 to Fred Wakefield:
$5,457.68 to Gary Allen: and $1,200.12 to Edwin Lee
Hogan: plus interest accrued to the date of payment.
minus the tax withholdings required by Federal,
state, and local laws.
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, Dee
Cee Floor Covering, Inc., and its alter ego, Dagin-
Akrab Floor Covering, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri,
its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall pay
244 NLRB No. 41
239
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
to the employees involved in this proceeding the fol-
lowing amounts:
Fred Wakefield $9,461.21
Gary Allen $5,457.68
Edwin Lee Hogan $1,200.12
with interest to be computed in the manner pre-
scribed in Florida Steel Corporation, 231 NLRB 651
(1977),4 less FICA and state, local, and Federal in-
come taxes which are to be deducted.
' See, generally, Isis Plumbing & Healing Co.. 138 NI.RB 716 (1962).
240