Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc. d/b/a Coserv Electric

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Oct 5, 2018

16-CA-149330 (N.L.R.B. Oct. 5, 2018)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DENTON COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
D/B/A COSERV ELECTRIC
and Case 16–CA–149330
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 220,
AFFILIATED WITH INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOLD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS
NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE
On June 28, 2016, Administrative Law Judge Robert A. Ringler issued a decision in this
case. The Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, the General Counsel filed an
answering brief, and the Respondent filed a reply brief. Additionally, the General Counsel filed
cross-exceptions and a supporting brief, the Respondent filed an answering brief, and the
General Counsel filed a reply brief.
On June 12, 2018, the Board issued a Decision and Order, severing and retaining for
further consideration certain complaint paragraphs.1 The severed complaint paragraphs allege
that several rules in the Respondent’s employee handbook violate Section 8(a)(1) of the National
Labor Relations Act (Act) based on the prong of the analytical framework set forth in Lutheran
Heritage Village-Livonia, 343 NLRB 646 (2004), that held an employer’s maintenance of a
facially neutral work rule would be unlawful “if employees would reasonably construe the
language to prohibit Section 7 activity.” Id. at 647. Recently, the Board overruled the Lutheran
Heritage “reasonably construe” test and announced a new standard that applies retroactively to
all pending cases. The Boeing Co., 365 NLRB No. 154, slip op. at 14–17 (2017).

1 366 NLRB No. 103. The Board ruled on the other complaint allegations that were before it on
exceptions.
2
Accordingly, the Board hereby issues the following notice to show cause why the severed
complaint allegations should not be remanded to the judge for further proceedings in light of
Boeing, including, if necessary, the filing of statements, reopening the record, and issuance of a
supplemental decision.
NOTICE IS GIVEN that any party seeking to show cause why this case should not be
remanded to the administrative law judge must do so in writing, filed with the Board in
Washington, D.C., on or before October 19, 2018 (with affidavit of service on the parties to this
proceeding). Any briefs or statements in support of the motion shall be filed on the same date.
Dated, Washington, D.C., October 5, 2018.
By direction of the Board:
/s/ Farah Z. Qureshi
Associate Executive Secretary