Guild Electrical Colorado LLC

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 19, 2003

338 N.L.R.B. 121 (N.L.R.B. 2003)

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.
Guild Electrical Colorado LLC and International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union
No. 68. Case 27–CA–18011–1
March 19, 2003
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS SCHAUMBER, WALSH, AND ACOSTA
The General Counsel seeks summary judgment in this
case on the ground that the Respondent has failed to file
an answer to the complaint. Upon a charge and an
amended charge filed by the Union on May 7 and May
23, 2002, respectively, the General Counsel issued a
complaint on July 30, 2002, against Guild Electrical
Colorado LLC, the Respondent, alleging that it violated
Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act. The Respondent
failed to file an answer.
On October 8, 2002, the General Counsel filed a Mo-
tion for Summary Judgment with the Board. On October
9, 2002, the Board issued an order transferring the pro-
ceeding to the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why
the motion should not be granted. The Respondent filed
no response. The allegations in the motion are therefore
undisputed.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations
provides that the allegations in the complaint shall be
deemed admitted if an answer is not filed within 14 days
from service of the complaint, unless good cause is
shown. In addition, the complaint affirmatively states
that unless an answer is filed within 14 days of service,
all the allegations in the complaint will be considered
admitted. Further, the undisputed allegations in the Mo-
tion for Summary Judgment disclose that the Region, by
letter dated September 26, 2002, notified the Respondent
that unless an answer was received by October 2, 2002, a
Motion for Summary Judgment would be filed.1

1 By a certified letter dated August 16, 2002, the Regional Director
for Region 27 informed the Respondent and its counsel, Michael T.
Mitchell, of its obligation to file an answer to the complaint. However,
by a letter dated August 19, 2002, Mitchell advised the Region that he
was in receipt of the Regional Director’s August 16, 2002 letter, and
that he did not represent the Respondent in this matter. On August 28,
2002, by regular mail, the Region served the Respondent with another
copy of the complaint. On September 26, 2002, the General Counsel
served by hand delivery a copy of the complaint and a letter to attorney
Gary L. Gottesfeld, advising him that if no answer was filed by October
2, 2002, a Motion for Summary Judgment would be filed with the
Board. The General Counsel also served the Respondent, by regular
mail, with copies of the complaint and the letter to Gottesfeld. None of
the copies served by regular mail were returned. See Lite Flight, 285
NLRB 647, 650 (1987) (failure of Post Office to return regular mail
indicates receipt).
In the absence of good cause being shown for the fail-
ure to file a timely answer, we grant the General Coun-
sel’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent, a corporation
with an office and place of business in Englewood, Colo-
rado (the Englewood facility), has been engaged in the
electrical construction business. The Respondent, in
conducting its business operations, annually purchases
and receives goods, materials, and services at its Engle-
wood facility valued in excess of $50,000 directly from
points and places outside the State of Colorado, and an-
nually provides goods and services valued in excess of
$50,000 directly to other enterprises located within the
State of Colorado which are directly engaged in interstate
commerce.
We find that the Respondent is an employer engaged
in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and
(7) of the Act, and that the Union is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
At all material times, Anthony Simpson has held the
position of manager and has been a supervisor of the
Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the
Act and an agent of the Respondent within the meaning
of Section 2(13) of the Act.
The following employees of the Respondent constitute
units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:

Unit A:
All journeymen and apprentice wiremen employed by
Respondent performing work covered by the terms of
the Denver Inside Electrical Construction Agreement
between the National Electrical Contractors Associa-
tion Rocky Mountain Chapter and the Union as set
forth in the collective bargaining agreement between
NECA and the Union effective by its terms for the pe-
riod June 1, 1999 to May 31, 2002 with extensions of
that agreement.

338 NLRB No. 121
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 2
Unit B:
All journeymen and apprentice wiremen employed by
Respondent performing work covered by the terms of
the Denver Residential Wiring Agreement between the
National Electrical Contractors Association Rocky
Mountain Chapter and the Union as set forth in the col-
lective bargaining agreement between NECA and the
Union effective by its terms for the period September 1,
1999 through August 31, 2001 with extensions of that
agreement.
The National Electrical Contractors Association
(NECA) has been an organization composed of employ-
ers engaged in the construction industry, one purpose of
which is to represent its employer-members in negotiat-
ing and administering a collective-bargaining agreement
with the Union.
NECA and the Union entered into a collective-
bargaining agreement, known as the Denver Inside Elec-
trical Construction Agreement, which is effective by its
terms from June 1, 1999, through May 31, 2002.
On about May 17, 1999, the Respondent, an employer
engaged in the building and construction industry, by
Letter of Assent A, assigned its collective-bargaining
rights to NECA and adopted the subsequently approved
Denver Inside Electrical Construction labor agreement
with the Union, which at all material times bound the
Respondent to the terms and conditions of employment
set forth in the Denver Inside Electrical Construction
Agreement.
The Letter of Assent A provides that the assignment of
bargaining rights to NECA shall remain in effect unless
notice of termination is given to both NECA and the Un-
ion 150 days prior to the expiration of the collective-
bargaining agreement.
The Letter of Assent A provides that, unless the as-
signment of bargaining rights is terminated as described
above, the Respondent agrees to be bound by all provi-
sions of subsequent labor agreements covering terms and
conditions of employment in Unit A.
By the actions described above, the Respondent
granted recognition to the Union as the exclusive repre-
sentative of Unit A for the period June 1, 1999, through
at least May 31, 2002 and, unless the assignment of bar-
gaining rights was timely terminated, for the term of sub-
sequent labor agreements, without regard to whether the
majority status of the Union had ever been established
under the provisions of Section 9(a) of the Act.
By a February 13, 2002 letter, the Respondent un-
timely gave notice to NECA and to the Union of its in-
tent to withdraw from the Denver Inside Electrical Con-
struction Agreement.
For the period of June 1, 1999 to May 31, 2002 and for
the period of subsequent approved labor agreements,
based on Section 9(a) of the Act, the Union has been the
limited exclusive collective-bargaining representative of
Unit A.2
NECA and the Union entered into a collective-
bargaining agreement, known as the Denver Residential
Wiring Agreement, which is effective by its terms from
September 1, 1999, through August 31, 2001.
On about April 27, 2001, the Respondent, by letter of
Assent A, assigned its collective-bargaining rights to
NECA and adopted the Denver Residential Wiring
Agreement with the Union, which at all material times
bound the Respondent to the terms and conditions of
employment set forth in that agreement.
The Letter of Assent A provides that the assignment of
bargaining rights to NECA shall remain in effect unless
notice of termination is given to both NECA and the Un-
ion 150 days prior to the expiration of the collective bar-
gaining agreement.
The Letter of Assent A provides that unless the as-
signment of bargaining rights is terminated as described
above, the Respondent agrees to be bound by all provi-
sions of subsequent labor agreements.
By the actions described above, the Respondent
granted recognition to the Union as the limited exclusive
bargaining representative of Unit B for the period of
April 17, 2001 through at least August 31, 2001 and,
unless the assignment of bargaining rights was timely
terminated, for the term of the subsequent labor agree-
ments, without regard to whether the majority status of
the Union had ever been established under the provisions
of Section 9(a) of the Act.
By letter of February 5, 2002, the Respondent un-
timely gave notice to NECA and to the Union of its in-
tent to withdraw from the Denver Residential Wiring
Agreement.
For the period of April 17, 2001 to August 31, 2001
and for the period of subsequent approved labor agree-
ments, based on Section 9(a) of the Act, the Union has
been the limited exclusive collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of Unit B.3
On about March 26, 2002, the Union requested that the
Respondent provide it with names, addresses, and tele-

2 The complaint alleges that the Respondent is a construction indus-
try employer and that it granted recognition to the Union without regard
to whether the Union had established majority status. Accordingly, we
find that the relationship was entered into pursuant to Sec. 8(f) and that
the Union is therefore the limited 9(a) representative of the unit em-
ployees for the period covered by the contract. See, e.g., A.S.B. Clo-
ture, Ltd., 313 NLRB 1012 (1994).
3 See fn. 2, supra.
GUILD ELECTRICAL COLORADO LLC 3
phone numbers of each person employed directly,
through temporary employment agencies or subcontrac-
tors in residential construction work and to furnish all
information that established the hourly wage rate, or
overtime pay, retirement benefits, health plan, holiday
and vacation plans of these individuals.
On about May 30, 2002, the Union requested that the
Respondent provide it with names, addresses, and tele-
phone numbers of each person employed directly,
through temporary employment agencies or subcontrac-
tors in inside electrical construction work and to furnish
all information that established the hourly wage rate, or
overtime pay, retirement benefits, health plan, holiday
and vacation plans of these individuals.
The information set forth above is relevant and neces-
sary to the Union’s performance of its duties as the lim-
ited exclusive collective-bargaining agent of employees
in Units A and B.
The Respondent has failed to provide the Union with
the information described above.
Since February 13, 2002, the Respondent has repudi-
ated the existence of and has failed to apply its collective
bargaining agreement with the Union, concerning wages,
hours, and other terms and conditions of employment of
employees employed in Unit A.
Since about February 5, 2002, the Respondent has re-
pudiated the existence of and has failed to apply its col-
lective bargaining agreement with the Union, concerning
wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of em-
ployment of employees employed in Unit B.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
By the acts and conduct described above, the Respon-
dent has failed and refused, and is failing and refusing, to
bargain collectively and in good faith with the limited
exclusive bargaining representative of its employees, and
has thereby engaged in unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1)
and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in cer-
tain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to cease and
desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
Specifically, having found that the Respondent has
violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by repudiating the exis-
tence of and failing to apply the terms and conditions of
the Denver Inside Electrical Construction Agreement on
behalf of the employees in Unit A, and the Denver Resi-
dential Wiring Agreement on behalf of the employees in
Unit B, we shall order the Respondent, on request, to
honor the terms and conditions of the approved labor
agreements between NECA and the Union and any
automatic renewal or extension of them. We shall also
order the Respondent to make whole the unit employees
for any loss of earnings and other benefits they may have
suffered as a result of the Respondent’s failure to abide
by the approved labor agreements, and any automatic
renewal or extension of them, covering the employees in
Units A and B since February 13 and February 5, 2002,
respectively. In addition, we shall order the Respondent
to make whole the unit employees by making all contrac-
tually required fringe benefit fund contributions, if any,
that have not been made on behalf of employees in Units
A & B since February 13 and 5, 2002, respectively, in-
cluding any additional amounts applicable to such delin-
quent payments in accordance with Merryweather Opti-
cal Co., 240 NLRB 1213, 1216 (1979).4 Further, the
Respondent shall reimburse the unit employees for any
expenses ensuing from its failure to make the required
contributions since the same dates, as set forth in Kraft
Plumbing & Heating, 252 NLRB 891 fn. 2 (1980), enfd.
mem. 661 F.2d 940 (9th Cir. 1981). All payments to unit
employees shall be computed in the manner set forth in
Ogle Protection Service, 183 NLRB 682 (1970), enfd.
444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971), with interest as prescribed
in New Horizons for the Retarded, 283 NLRB 1171
(1987).
Finally, having found that the Respondent has failed
and refused to furnish the Union information that is rele-
vant and necessary to its role as the limited exclusive
bargaining representative of the unit employees, we shall
order the Respondent to furnish the Union with the in-
formation it requested on March 26 and May 30, 2002.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Guild Electrical Colorado LLC, Englewood,
Colorado, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Repudiating the existence of and failing to apply its
collective bargaining agreements with International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 68,
as the limited exclusive collective-bargaining representa-
tive of the employees in the bargaining units set forth
below, during the term of the agreements and any auto-
matic renewal or extension of them.

4 To the extent that an employee has made personal contributions to
a benefit or other fund that have been accepted by the fund in lieu of
the Respondent’s delinquent contributions during the period of delin-
quency, the Respondent will reimburse the employee, but the amount of
such reimbursement will constitute a setoff to the amount that the Re-
spondent otherwise owes the fund.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 4
Unit A:
All journeymen and apprentice wiremen employed by
Respondent performing work covered by the terms of
the Denver Inside Electrical Construction Agreement
between the National Electrical Contractors Associa-
tion Rocky Mountain Chapter and the Union as set
forth in the collective bargaining agreement between
NECA and the Union effective by its terms for the pe-
riod June 1, 1999 to May 31, 2002 with extensions of
that agreement.

Unit B:
All journeymen and apprentice wiremen employed by
Respondent performing work covered by the terms of
the Denver Residential Wiring Agreement between the
National Electrical Contractors Association Rocky
Mountain Chapter and the Union as set forth in the col-
lective bargaining agreement between NECA and the
Union effective by its terms for the period September 1,
1999 through August 31, 2001 with extensions of that
agreement.

(b) Failing and refusing to provide the Union with in-
formation necessary to the Union’s performance of its
duties as the limited exclusive collective bargaining rep-
resentative of employees in Units A and B.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Comply with the terms and conditions of its collec-
tive bargaining agreements with the Union covering the
employees in Units A and B, during their term and any
automatic renewal or extension of them.
(b) Make whole the unit employees for any loss of
earnings and other benefits they may have suffered as a
result of its failure to comply with the agreements, during
their term or any automatic renewal or extension of them,
since February 13 and February 5, 2002, respectively,
with interest as prescribed in the remedy section of this
decision.
(c) Make all contractually required fringe benefit fund
contributions, if any, that have not been made on behalf
of employees in Units A and B since February 13 and 5,
2002, respectively, and reimburse unit employees for any
expenses ensuing from its failure to make the required
payments, in the manner set forth in the remedy section
of this decision.
(d) Furnish the Union with the information that it re-
quested on March 26 and May 30, 2002.
(e) Preserve and, within 14 days of a request, or such
additional time as the Regional Director may allow for
good cause shown, provide at a reasonable place desig-
nated by the Board or its agents, all payroll records, so-
cial security payment records, timecards, personnel re-
cords and reports, and all other records including an elec-
tronic copy of such records if stored in electronic form,
necessary to analyze the amount of backpay due under
the terms of this Order.
(f) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Englewood, Colorado, copies of the at-
tached notice marked “Appendix.”5 Copies of the notice,
on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region
27,after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized
representative, shall be posted by the Respondent and
maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous
places including all places where notices to employees
are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken
by the Respondent to ensure that the notices are not al-
tered, defaced, or covered by any other material. In the
event that, during the pendency of these proceedings, the
Respondent has gone out of business or closed the facil-
ity involved in these proceedings, the Respondent shall
duplicate and mail, at its own expense, a copy of the no-
tice to all current employees and former employees em-
ployed by the Respondent at any time since February 5,
2002.
(g) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file
with the Regional Director a sworn certification of a re-
sponsible official on a form provided by the Region at-
testing to the steps that the Respondent has taken to
comply.

Dated, Washington, D.C., March 19, 2003

Peter C. Schaumber , Member

Dennis P. Walsh, Member

R. Alexander Acosta, Member

(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

5 If 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 Na-
tional Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board.”
GUILD ELECTRICAL COLORADO LLC 5
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 vio-
lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey
this notice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join or assist a union
Choose representatives to bargain with us on
your behalf
Act together with other employees for your bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected
activities

WE WILL NOT repudiate the existence of and fail to ap-
ply our collective-bargaining agreements with Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union
No. 68, as the limited exclusive collective-bargaining
representative of the employees in the bargaining units
set forth below, during the term of the agreements and
any automatic renewal or extension of them.

Unit A:

All journeymen and apprentice wiremen employed by
us performing work covered by the terms of the Denver
Inside Electrical Construction Agreement between the
National Electrical Contractors Association Rocky
Mountain Chapter and the Union as set forth in the col-
lective bargaining agreement between NECA and the
Union effective by its terms for the period June 1, 1999
to May 31, 2002 with extensions of that agreement.
Unit B:
All journeymen and apprentice wiremen employed by
us performing work covered by the terms of the Denver
Residential Wiring Agreement between the National
Electrical Contractors Association Rocky Mountain
Chapter and the Union as set forth in the collective bar-
gaining agreement between NECA and the Union ef-
fective by its terms for the period September 1, 1999
through August 31, 2001 with extensions of that
agreement.

WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to furnish the Union with
information that is necessary for, and relevant to, the
Union’s performance of its function as the limited exclu-
sive collective-bargaining representative of the employ-
ees in Units A and B.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL comply with the terms and conditions of our
collective bargaining agreements with the Union cover-
ing the employees in Units A and B, during their term
and any automatic renewal or extension of them.
WE WILL make whole the unit employees for any loss
of earnings and other benefits they may have suffered as
a result of our failure to comply with the agreements,
during their term or any automatic renewal or extension
of them, since February 13 and February 5, 2002, respec-
tively, with interest.
WE WILL make all contractually required fringe benefit
fund contributions, if any, that have not been made on
behalf of employees in Units A and B since February 13
and 5, 2002, respectively, and reimburse unit employees
for any expenses ensuing from our failure to make the
required payments, with interest.
WE WILL furnish the Union with information that it re-
quested on March 26 and May 30, 2002.
GUILD ELECTRICAL COLORADO LLC