Diversified Bank Installations

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 23, 2000

331 N.L.R.B. 29 (N.L.R.B. 2000)

331 NLRB No. 29
1
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex-
ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C.
20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can
be included in the bound volumes.
Diversified Bank Installations, Inc. and its Alter Ego
Atm Works, Inc. and International Association
of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron
Workers, Local Union 512. Case 18-CA-13928
May 23, 2000
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS FOX, LIEBMAN, AND HURTGEN
On September 26, 1997, the National Labor Relations
Board issued a Decision and Order,1 inter alia, ordering
Diversified Bank Installations, Inc., (DBI) to make whole
unit employee Scott Harrington for loss of earnings and
other benefits resulting from his discharge, and to make
whole all bargaining unit employees and the Union
fringe benefit funds for loss of earnings and other bene-
fits resulting from its failure to abide by the terms and
conditions of its collective-bargaining agreement with
the Union in violation of the National Labor Relations
Act. On March 26, 1999, the United States Court of Ap-
peals for the Eighth Circuit enforced the Board’s Deci-
sion and Order.
A controversy having arisen over the amount of back-
pay and reimbursement due the unit employees and con-
tributions owed the fringe benefit funds, on February 29,
2000, the Regional Director for Region 18 issued a com-
pliance specification and notice of hearing alleging the
amount due under the Board's Order, and notifying the
Respondent that it should file a timely answer complying
with the Board's Rules and Regulations. Although prop-
erly served with a copy of the compliance specification,
the Respondent failed to file an answer.2
By letter dated March 23, 2000, the Acting Regional
Attorney advised the Respondent that no answer to the
compliance specification had been received and that
unless an appropriate answer was filed by March 30,
2000, default summary judgment would be sought. The
Respondent filed no answer.
On April 18, 2000, the General Counsel filed with the
Board a motion for default summary judgment, with ex-
hibits attached. On April 20, 2000, the Board issued an
order transferring the proceeding to the Board and a No-
tice to Show Cause why the motion should not be
granted. The Respondent again filed no response. The
allegations in the motion and in the compliance
specification are therefore undisputed.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.

1 324 NLRB 457.
2 In the compliance specification, the Regional Director named not
only DBI as a respondent, but also named ATM Works, Inc. (ATM) as
DBI’s alter ego.
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.56(a) of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions provides that the Respondent shall file an answer
within 21 days from service of a compliance specifica-
tion. Section 102.56(c) of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions states:
If the respondent fails to file any answer to the specifi-
cation within the time prescribed by this section, the
Board may, either with or without taking evidence in
support of the allegations of the specification and with-
out further notice to the respondent, find the specifica-
tion to be true and enter such order as may be appropri-
ate.
According to the uncontroverted allegations of the mo-
tion for default summary judgment, the Respondent, de-
spite having been advised of the filing requirements, has
failed to file an answer to the compliance specification.
In the absence of good cause for the Respondent's failure
to file an answer, we deem the allegations in the compli-
ance specification to be admitted as true, and grant the
General Counsel's motion for default summary judg-
ment.3 Accordingly, we conclude that amounts due the
discriminatees and the funds are as stated in the compli-
ance specification and we will order payment by the Re-
spondent of the amounts, plus interest accrued on the
amounts to the date of payment.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Re-
spondent, Diversified Bank Installations, Inc. and its alter
ego ATM Works, Inc., Lake Elmo, Minnesota, its offi-
cers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall make whole
the following individuals and funds, by paying them the
amounts set forth below, with interest on the backpay
owed the individuals as prescribed in New Horizons for
the Retarded, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987), and any addi-
tional amounts accruing on the fund contributions as pre-
scribed in Merryweather Optical Co., 240 NLRB 1213
(1979), minus tax withholdings on the backpay due the
individuals required by Federal and state laws:

3 The allegation in the compliance specification that ATM is DBI’s
alter ego is uncontroverted. Accordingly, we find that ATM is DBI’s
alter ego, as alleged.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 2

Scott Harrington $35,497.00
Elmer Perkins 1080.00
Chad Ericson 919.00
Jeff Bauer 126.00
Ryan Wente 258.00
Doug Trudeau 96.00
Michael Blaisdell 345.00
Vinh Vo 324.00
Scott Schleif 63.00
Steve Reed 87.00
Tuyen Bui 64.00
Local 512 Fringe Benefits 128,956.00
Total $167,815.00

Dated, Washington, D.C. May 23, 2000

Sarah M. Fox, Member

Wilma B. Liebman, Member

Peter J. Hurtgen, Member

(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD