Fiberglass Dura Mas, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 1, 1980

250 N.L.R.B. 359 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

iFllFR(lI ASS I)URA MAS. INC.
Fiberglass Dura Mlas, Inc. and Carlos 1N. Figueroa
Ocasio. Case 24-CA-4245
July 1, 1980
DECISION AND ORDER
Be M Mtl RS JI NKINS, PI NI II 0, \NI)
TR l ISI) SAI lI
Upon a charge filed on December 4, 1979, and
amended on December 10. 1979, by Carlos M. Fi-
gueroa Ocasio, an individual, herein called Figue-
roa, and duly served on Fiberglass Dura Mas, Inc.,
herein called Respondent, the General Counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board, by the Re-
gional Director for Region 24, issued a complaint
on February 11, 1980, against Respondent, alleging
that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging
in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within
the meaning of Section 8(a)(l) and Section 2(6) and
(7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amend-
ed. Copies of the charge, amended charge, com-
plaint and notice of hearing before an administra-
tive law judge were duly served on the parties to
this proceeding. Respondent failed to file an
answer to the complaint.'
On May 5, 1980, counsel for the General Coun-
sel filed directly with the Board a Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment and a Petition in Support of
Motion for Summary Judgment. On May 8, 1980,
counsel for the General Counsel filed an amend-
ment to the Motion for Summary Judgment. Subse-
quently, on May 12, 1980, the Board issued an
order transferring the proceeding to the Board and
a Notice To Show Cause why the General Coun-
sel's Motion for Summary Judgment should not be
granted. Respondent did not file a response to the
Notice To Show Cause, and therefore the allega-
tions in the Motion for Summary Judgment and the
Petition in Support of Motion for Summary Judg-
ment 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:
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides:
I ()i :chrIuar 1'1 Ig(t, Rc',pondci entered n tol l , trltilllc .Igrc-
mcnil :oIcerniBng matters ral,,d hx toh Int1ltlt lcom ipl.itt () i NIMarch 14.
I1980. tlh, Regtgio II lrDir.'lr fior Rcglon 24 s.et .l',d thc ,,ltnlinl aigre-
mcnl illld rcin a.ltdl IhC COlTltplaiiltt Al lio Ili'e, eIlther hvC;orc lr ilflCr C1-
erilng lltO t(he setnttln l igrelllicl. I11s, Re,..l.ideill filei ;111 .al.mtl eto
Ihe complalit
250 NLRB No. 43
The respondent shall, within 1() days from the
service of the complaint, file an answr er 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 ansxwer
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 kno\wledge. 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 by [Respond-
ent] to be true and may be so found by the Board."
Further, according to the uncontroverted allega-
tions of the Petition in Support of Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment, Respondent was advised by certi-
fied letter dated March 14, 1980, that it had failed
to file an answer and that summary judgment
would be sought herein unless an answer to the
complaint was filed by March 24, 1980. As noted
above, Respondent has failed to file an answer to
the complaint and has failed to file a response to
the Notice To Show Cause.
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:
FINDI)INGS OF FACT
1. IHF. BUSINESS OF RI SPONI)D N
At all times material herein, Respondent, a
Puerto Rican corporation, with an office and place
of business in Santure, Puerto Rico, and a factory
in Catano, Puerto Rico, has been engaged in the
manufacture, sale, at retail and wholesale, and dis-
tribution of water, gasoline and diesel oil tanks,
marine equipment, and related products. During
the 12 months preceding the issuance of the instant
complaint, a representative period, Respondent, in
the course and conduct of its operations, derived
gross revenues therefrom in excess of $500,000.
During the 12 months preceding the issuance of the
instant complaint, a representative period, Re-
)I)IDtISI()NS ()F NA I()NAI. I.AH()R RI LAII()NS IB()ARI)
spondent. in the course and conduct of its business,
purchased and caused to be transported and deliv-
ered to its place of business, goods and materials
valued in excess of $50,000, of which goods and
materials valued in excess of $50,000 were trans-
ported and delivered to it, and received from other
enterprises, including, inter alia, Reichhold Chemi-
cal del Caribe, Inc., located in the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, each of which other enterprises
had received the said goods and materials in inter-
state commerce directly from points and places lo-
cated outside the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
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.
11. THE, UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICF.S
On or about November 30, 1979, Respondent's
employee Figueroa concertedly complained to Re-
spondent regarding the wages, hours, and working
conditions of Respondent's employees. On or about
December 3, 1979, Respondent, by its agent and
supervisor, President and General Manager Jorge
J. Ortiz, discharged Figueroa because of his pro-
tected concerted activities and to discourage em-
ployees from engaging in such activities or other
concerted activities for the purpose of collective
bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. At all
times since about December 3, 1979, Respondent
has failed and refused, and continues to fail and
refuse, to reinstate employee Figueroa to his
former position or, if it no longer exists, to a sub-
stantially equivalent position.
Accordingly, we find that, by the aforesaid con-
duct, Respondent has interfered with, restrained,
and coerced, and is interfering with, restraining,
and coercing, its employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed to them in Section 7 of the Act,
and thereby has engaged in and is engaging in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(1) of the Act.
III. THE EEFECT OF THE UNFAIR L.ABOR
PRACTICiES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent set forth in section
I1, 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.
IV. i-IHE R-MIID)Y
Having found that Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act, we shall
order that it cease and desist therefrom and take af-
firmative action designed to effectuate the policies
of the Act.
We have found that Repondent unlawfully dis-
charged employee Carlos M. Figueroa Ocasio on
December 3, 1979. We shall order that he be of-
fered immediate and full reinstatement to his
former job or, if such position no longer exists, to a
substantially equivalent position, without prejudice
to his seniority or other rights and privileges previ-
ously enjoyed. We shall also order that Respondent
make Figueroa whole for any loss of pay he may
have suffered by reason of his unlawful discharge
by Respondent by paying him a sum equal to what
he would have earned, less any net interim earn-
ings, plus interest. Backpay with interest thereon is
to be computed in the manner prescribed in F. W.
Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289 (1950), and
Florida Steel Corporation, 231 NLRB 651 (1977).2
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following:
CONCL.USIONS OF LAW
1. Fiberglass Dura Mas, Inc., is an employer en-
gaged in commerce within the meaning of Section
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. By the acts described in section II, above, Re-
spondent has interfered with, restrained, and co-
erced, and is interfering with, restraining, and co-
ercing, employees in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed to them in Section 7 of the Act, and
thereby has engaged in and is engaging in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(a)(1) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning 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 Re-
lations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Fiberglass Dura Mas, Inc., Santurce and Catano,
Puerto Rico, its officers, agents, successors, and as-
signs, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Discharging employees for complaining about
wages, hours, and working conditions, or for en-
gaging in other protected concerted activities.
2 Stee gcnerailN. /w I 'iitpnh mg & I i' uiii' (', 118 NI RI 710 '1)62)
360
FIBE1 RGI ASS DUIRA MAS. INC.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering
with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7
of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which
the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the
Act:
(a) Offer Carlos M. Figueroa Ocasio full and im-
mediate reinstatement to his former job or, if that
job no longer exists, to a substantially equivalent
position, without prejudice to his seniority or any
other rights or privileges previously enjoyed, and
make him whole, plus interest, for any loss of earn-
ings he may have suffered by reason of his unlaw-
ful discharge in the manner set forth in the section
herein entitled "The Remedy."
(b) 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.
(c) Post at its place of business in Santurce and its fac-
tory in Catano, Puerto Rico, copies, in both the English
and Spanish languages as is customary in that Region, of
the attached notice marked "Appendix."3 Copies of said
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 24. after being duly signed by Respondent's au-
thorized representative, shall be posted by Respondent,
immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by
: In the event that this Order is enforced hby a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals., the Words il the notice reading "Posted h5
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 Labor Relations Board"
it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous
places, including all places where notices to employees
are customarily posted. Reasonable 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 24,
in writing, within 20 days from the date of this
Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to
comply herewith.
APPENDIX
NOT'IICE To EMPtOYFES
POSTED BY ORDER o: THE
NATIONAL LABOR REILATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WIl.L NOT discharge employees because
they have complained about wages, hours, and
working conditions, or engaged in other pro-
tected concerted activities.
WE WILL. NOT in any like or related manner
interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed them in
Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.
WE WILL offer Carlos M. Figueroa Ocasio
full and immediate reinstatement to his former
job or, if that job no longer exists, to a sub-
stantially equivalent position, without preju-
dice to his seniority or any other rights or
privileges previously enjoyed, and WE WIlL
make him whole for any loss of earnings he
may have suffered by reason of our unlawful
discharge of him, with interest.
FIBERGI.ASS DURA MAS, INC.
361bl