Health Care Service Group

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 20, 2000

332 N.L.R.B. 1301 (N.L.R.B. 2000)

HEALTH CARE SERVICES GROUP 1301
Health Care Services Group, Inc. and 1115 Florida
Division of 1199, Service Employees Interna-
tional Union, AFL–CIO, CLC. Case 12–CA–
20920
November 20, 2000
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN TRUESDALE AND MEMBERS FOX
AND LIEBMAN
Pursuant to a charge filed on June 27, 2000, the Gen-
eral Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board is-
sued a complaint on July 24, 2000, alleging that the Re-
spondent has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act by refusing the Union’s re-
quest to bargain following the Union’s certification in
Case 12–RC–8066 as amended by stipulation of the par-
ties in 12–AC–39. (Official notice is taken of the “re-
cord” in the representation proceeding as defined in the
Board’s Rules and Regulations, Secs. 102.68 and
102.69(g); Frontier Hotel, 265 NLRB 343 (1982).) The
Respondent filed an answer admitting in part and deny-
ing in part the allegations in the complaint.
On September 29, 2000, the General Counsel filed a
Motion for Summary Judgment. On October 4, 2000, the
Board issued an order transferring the proceeding to the
Board and a Notice to Show Cause why the motion
should not be granted. The Respondent filed a response.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
In its answer the Respondent admits its refusal to bar-
gain and to furnish information that is alleged to be rele-
vant and necessary to the Union’s role as bargaining rep-
resentative, but attacks the validity of the certification on
the basis of its objections to the election in the represen-
tation proceeding.
All representation issues raised by the Respondent
were or could have been litigated in the prior representa-
tion proceeding. The Respondent does not offer to ad-
duce at a hearing any newly discovered and previously
unavailable evidence, nor does it allege any special cir-
cumstances that would require the Board to reexamine
the decision made in the representation proceeding. We
therefore find that the Respondent has not raised any
representation issue that is properly litigable in this un-
fair labor practice proceeding. See Pittsburgh Plate
Glass Co. v. NLRB, 313 U.S. 146, 162 (1941).
We also find that there are no issues warranting a hear-
ing with respect to the Union’s request for information.
The Respondent admits that by letters dated January 21
and June 28, 2000, the Union requested that the Respon-
dent furnish it with the following information:
1. A list of current employees, including their names,
dates of hire, rates of pay, job classification, department,
last known address, and phone number;
2. A copy of all current company personnel policies
and procedures which relate to or have an effect on bar-
gaining unit employees, including but not limited to,
leave of absence, shifts, starting times, hiring rules,
safety rules, vacation, holidays, and overtimes;
3. A copy of all company fringe benefit plans, includ-
ing pension, profit sharing, severance, stock initiative,
health insurance, apprenticeship, training, legal services,
child care, or any other plans which relate to the employ-
ees, and where applicable, copies of summary plan de-
scriptions for such plans;
4. Copies of all current job descriptions for bargaining
unit employees;
5. Copies of any company wage and salary plans, in-
cluding schedules for employees on incentive jobs;
6. Copies of OSHA 200 logs for the past three years;
7. The Cost Report files with the AHCA for the last 3
years;
8. Any and all agreements signed with all subcontrac-
tors that relate to the bargaining unit employees’ jobs,
wages, benefits, and working conditions.
In its answer, the Respondent admits only that “cer-
tain” of this information is necessary and relevant for
purposes of collective bargaining. We find that with
exception of the cost and subcontracting information
requested in Items 7 and 8, the foregoing types of infor-
mation are presumptively relevant for purposes of collec-
tive bargaining and must be furnished on request.1 The
Respondent has not attempted to rebut the relevance of
the information requested in items 1-6, and we therefore
find that no material issues of fact exist with respect to
the Respondent’s refusal to furnish this information.

1 Zeta Consumer Products Corp., 326 NLRB 293 (1998) (OSHA
200 logs); Trustees of Masonic Hall, 261 NLRB 436 (1982) (compen-
sation and employment information); Mobay Chemical Corp., 233
NLRB 109 (1977)(same).
Item 7’s reference to the “Cost Report files with the AHCA” is not
further explained in the record, but it appears that the Union was seek-
ing financial information. The Board has held that financial informa-
tion is not presumptively relevant and that the union must therefore
demonstrate the relevance of the information. See Troy Hills Nursing
Home, 326 NLRB 1465 (1998). Similarly, the Board has held that the
subcontracting information sought in Item 8 is not presumptively rele-
vant. Associated Ready Mixed Concrete, 318 NLRB 318 (1995), enfd.
108 F. 3d 1182 (9th Cir. 1997). Here, neither the complaint nor the
motion for summary judgment explain why the Respondent had an
obligation to provide the cost and subcontracting information. We
therefore deny the General Counsel’s Motion for Summary Judgment
with respect to the information requested in Items 7 and 8, and we
remand those issues to the Regional Director for further appropriate
action.
332 NLRB No. 127
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 1302
Accordingly, we grant the Motion for Summary Judg-
ment, and we will order the Respondent to bargain and to
furnish the requested information, with the exception of
the cost and subcontracting information requested in
Items 7 and 8.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent, a Pennsylvania
corporation, with an office and place of business at Mar-
gate, Florida, has been engaged in the business of provid-
ing laundry and housekeeping services to various nursing
homes in the State of Florida, including Richmond
Health Care d/b/a Sunrise Health and Rehabilitation Cen-
ter, at 4800 Nob Hill Road, Sunrise, Florida. During the
12 months prior to issuance of the complaint, the Re-
spondent, in conducting its business operations, derived
gross revenues in excess of $100,000, and during that
same time period purchased and received goods valued
in excess of $50,000 directly from points outside the
State of Florida. We find that the Respondent is an em-
ployer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Sec-
tion 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
A. The Certification
Following the election held May 9, 1997, the Union
was certified on July 22, 1999, as the exclusive collec-
tive-bargaining representative of the employees in the
following appropriate unit:

All full-time and regular part-time laundry and house-
keeping employees employed by Respondent at Rich-
mond Health Care d/b/a Sunrise Health and Rehabilita-
tion Center in Sunrise, Florida; excluding all other em-
ployees, office clerical employees, guards and supervi-
sors as defined in the Act.

The Union continues to be the exclusive representative
under Section 9(a) of the Act.2
B. Refusal to Bargain
Since January 21, 2000, the Union has requested the
Respondent to recognize and bargain with it as the exclu-
sive collective-bargaining representative of the unit, and
to furnish information, and, since January 21, 2000, the

2 As alleged in the complaint and admitted in the Answer, on June
13, 2000, in Case 12–CA–39, the Regional Director for Region 12 of
the Board, pursuant to stipulations executed by the Respondent and the
Union, amended the certification issued in Case 12–RC–8066 to substi-
tute the Union as the certified union with respect to the unit.
Respondent has refused. We find that this refusal consti-
tutes an unlawful refusal to bargain in violation of Sec-
tion 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
By refusing on and after January 21, 2000, to recog-
nize and bargain with the Union as the exclusive collec-
tive-bargaining representative of employees in the ap-
propriate unit and to furnish the Union requested infor-
mation, the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor prac-
tices 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 violated Section
8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall order it to cease and
desist, to bargain on request with the Union, and, if an
understanding is reached, to embody the understanding
in a signed agreement. We also shall order the Respon-
dent to furnish the Union the information requested by
letters dated January 21 and June 28, 2000, with the ex-
ception of the cost and subcontracting information.
To ensure that the employees are accorded the services
of their selected bargaining agent for the period provided
by the law, we shall construe the initial period of the cer-
tification as beginning the date the Respondent begins to
bargain in good faith with the Union. Mar-Jac Poultry
Co., 136 NLRB 785 (1962); Lamar Hotel, 140 NLRB
226, 229 (1962), enfd. 328 F.2d 600 (5th Cir. 1964), cert.
denied 379 U.S. 817 (1964); Burnett Construction Co.,
149 NLRB 1419, 1421 (1964), enfd. 350 F.2d 57 (10th
Cir. 1965).
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Health Care Services Group, Inc., Margate,
Florida its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Refusing to bargain with 1115 Florida Division of
1199, Service Employees International Union, AFL–
CIO, CLC, as the exclusive bargaining representative of
the employees in the bargaining unit, and refusing to
furnish the Union information that is relevant and neces-
sary to its role as the exclusive bargaining representative
of the unit employees.
(b) 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) On request, bargain with the Union as the exclusive
representative of the employees in the following appro-
priate unit on terms and conditions of employment, and if
HEALTH CARE SERVICES GROUP 1303
an understanding is reached, embody the understanding
in a signed agreement:

All full-time and regular part-time laundry and house-
keeping employees employed by Respondent at Rich-
mond Health Care d/b/a Sunrise Health and Rehabilita-
tion Center in Sunrise, Florida; excluding all other em-
ployees, office clerical employees, guards and supervi-
sors as defined in the Act.

(b) Furnish the Union the information it requested on
January 21 and June 28, 2000, with the exception of the
cost and subcontracting information.
(c) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Margate, Florida, and at the Sunrise Health
and Rehabilitation Center facility in Sunrise, Florida,
copies of the attached notice marked “Appendix.”3 Cop-
ies of the notice, on forms provided by the Regional Di-
rector for Region 12 after being signed by the Respon-
dent’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 no-
tices are not altered, 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 facility involved in these proceedings, the Re-
spondent shall duplicate and mail, at its own expense, a
copy of the notice to all current employees and former
employees employed by the Respondent at any time
since January 21, 2000.
(c) 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.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the allegations in
the complaint with respect to the information requested
in Items 7 and 8 are remanded to the Regional Director
for further appropriate action.

3 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.”

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 the National Labor Relations Act and has ordered us to
post and abide by this notice.

Section 7 of the Act gives employees these rights.
To organize
To form, join, or assist any union
To bargain collectively through representatives
of their own choice
To act together for other mutual aid or protection
To choose not to engage in any of these protected
concerted activities.

WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain with 1115 Florida
Division of 1199, Service Employees International Un-
ion, AFL–CIO, CLC as the exclusive representative of
the employees in the bargaining unit, and WE WILL
NOT refuse to furnish the Union information that is rele-
vant and necessary to its role as the exclusive bargaining
representative of the unit employees.
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, on request, bargain with the Union and put
in writing and sign any agreement reached on terms and
conditions of employment for our employees in the bar-
gaining unit:

All full-time and regular part-time laundry and house-
keeping employees employed by us at Richmond
Health Care d/b/a Sunrise Health and Rehabilitation
Center in Sunrise, Florida; excluding all other employ-
ees, office clerical employees, guards and supervisors
as defined in the Act.

WE WILL furnish the Union the information it re-
quested on January 21 and June 28, 2000, with the ex-
ception of the cost and subcontracting information.
HEALTH CARE SERVICES GROUP, INC.