Domek & Sons

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 5, 1980

247 N.L.R.B. 847 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

DOMEK & SONS
Domek & Sons and Matt Junius. Case 13-CA- 19131
February 5, 1980
DECISION AND ORDER
By CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS JENKINS
AND TRUESDALE
Upon a charge filed on September 21, 1979, by Matt
Junius, herein called the Charging Party, and duly
served on Domek & Sons, herein called Respondent,
the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations
Board, by the Regional Director for Region 13, issued
a complaint and notice of hearing on October 31,
1979, against Respondent, alleging that Respondent
has engaged in, and is engaging in, unfair labor
practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8(a)(3) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Thereaf-
ter, on September 25, 1979, the Regional Director for
Region 13 mailed to Respondent a letter which
advised that a charge had been filed against Respon-
dent with the National Labor Relations Board and
served on Respondent a copy of the charge. Thereaf-
ter, on November 5, 1979, the Regional Director for
Region 13, as no answer or other response to the
proceedings had been tendered by Respondent, caused
a copy of the complaint to be personally served at
Respondent's business address. Further, on November
16, 1979, counsel for the General Counsel, observing
that no answer had yet been filed, sent Respondent a
telegram which advised that Respondent had failed to
file an answer to the complaint and gave Respondent
until November 26, 1979, to file an answer. No answer
to the complaint has been filed to date.
On November 27, 1979, counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a motion to
transfer the proceeding to the Board and for summary
judgment based on Respondent's failure to file an
answer and Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and
Regulations, Series 8, as amended. An order transfer-
ring the proceeding to the Board and Notice To Show
Cause was issued on December 7, 1979. Respondent
has filed no response to the Notice To Show Cause
and, accordingly, the allegations of the Motion for
Summary Judgment stand uncontroverted.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides:
247 NLRB No. 120
The respondent shall, within 10 days from the
service of the complaint, file an answer thereto.
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 admit-
ted 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 specifically states that unless an answer to
the complaint is filed by Respondent within 10 days of
service thereof "all of the allegations in the complaint
shall be deemed to be admitted by it to be true and
may be so found by the Board." According to the
uncontroverted allegations of the Motion for Summa-
ry Judgment, Respondent has failed to file an answer
to the complaint and does not oppose the Motion for
Summary Judgment. Respondent did not file a re-
sponse to the Notice To Show Cause. No good cause
to the contrary having been shown, in accordance with
the rules set forth above, the allegations of the
complaint are deemed to be admitted and found to be
true. Accordingly, we grant the Motion for Summary
Judgment.
On the basis of the entire record the Board makes
the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT
Respondent is, and has been at all times material
herein, a corporation duly organized under, and
existing by virtue of, the laws of the State of Illinois,
and maintains its place of business at 1485 Landmier
Road, Elk Grove Village, Illinois. Respondent is now,
and at all times material herein has been, engaged in,
at its place of business in Elk Grove Village, the
business of installing acoustical ceilings and drywall.
During the past year, a representative period, in the
course and conduct of installing acoustical ceilings
and drywall, Respondent has received gross revenues
in excess of $500,000 and has received at its Elk Grove
Village facility goods and materials valued in excess of
$50,000 from other enterprises located within the
State of Illinois, which enterprises had received said
goods and materials directly from points outside the
State of Illinois during the same calendar year.
847
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that
Respondent 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 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
On or about September 19, 1979, Respondent
discharged and has since failed and refused to rein-
state its employee Matt Junius because of his having
engaged in union and/or other protected concerted
activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or
other mutal aid or protection.
Accordingly, we find that, by the aforementioned
conduct, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(a)(3) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
III. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR
PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent set forth in section 2,
above, occurring in connection with its operations
described in section 1, above, have a close, intimate,
and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and
commerce among the several States and tend to lead
to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
IV. THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(a)(3) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, we
shall order that Respondent cease and desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act. Respondent will be
directed to offer to Matt Junius immediate and full
reinstatement to his former position or, if such
position no longer exists, to a substantially equivalent
position, without prejudice to any seniority or other
rights and privileges previously enjoyed by him.
Respondent will also be directed to make Matt Junius
whole for any loss of pay which he may have suffered
by reason of the discharge,' plus interest.'
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts and
the entire record, makes the following:
' This should be done in accordance with F W. Woolworth Company, 90
NLRB 289 (1950).
' Interest is to be computed in the manner set forth in Florida Steel
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I. Domek & Sons is an employer engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7)
of the Act.
2. By discharging and thereafter refusing to rein-
state Matt Junius because he engaged in the protected
activity of assisting a labor organization and/or other
protected concerted activities for the purpose of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protec-
tion, Respondent has interfered with, restrained, and
coerced Matt Junius in the exercise of his rights
guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act and has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the mean-
ing 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
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Domek & Sons, Elk Grove Village, Illinois, its
officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
I. Cease and desist from:
(a) Discharging or refusing to reinstate any employ-
ee because he or she has engaged in union and/or
other protected concerted activities for the purpose of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protec-
tion.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of
their rights guaranteed under Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Offer to Matt Junius immediate and full rein-
statement to his former job or, if that job no longer
exists, to a substantially equivalent position, without
prejudice to his seniority or other rights and privileges,
and make him whole for all losses he may have
suffered by reason of the discrimination against him,
in accordance with the formula set forth in the section
of this Decision entitled "The Remedy."
(b) Preserve and, upon request, make available to
the Board or its agents, for examination and copying,
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.
Corporation. 231 NLRB 651 (1977), and Isis Plumbing & Heating Co.. 138
NLRB 716(1962).
848
DOMEK & SONS
(c) Post at its Elk Grove Village, Illinois, facility
copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix."3
Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the
Regional Director for Region 13, after being duly
signed by Respondent's representative, shall be posted
by Respondent 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. Reason-
able steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that
said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any
other material.
(d) Notify the Regional Director for Region 13, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps have been taken to comply herewith.
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 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
The National Labor Relations Board has found that
we violated the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, by discharging an employee because he
engaged in protected concerted activities. We have
been ordered to post this notice and we intend to abide
by the following:
WE WILL NOT discharge or refuse to reinstate
any employee who engaged in union and/or other
protected concerted activities for the purpose of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or
protection.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner
interfere with, restrain, or coerce any employee in
the exercise of his or her rights guaranteed under
the Act to assist a labor organization.
WE WILL offer Matt Junius immediate and full
reinstatement to his former job or, if that job no
longer exists, to a substantially equivalent posi-
tion, without prejudice to any seniority or other
rights and privileges previously enjoyed by him.
WE WILL make Matt Junius whole, with
interest, for any loss of pay or other benefits
which he may have suffered by reason of the
discharge.
DOMEK & SONS
849