Holmberg Roofing, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 31, 2005

344 N.L.R.B. 50 (N.L.R.B. 2005)

344 NLRB No. 50
Holmberg Roofing, Inc. and United Union of Roofers
and Waterproofers, Local 81, AFL–CIO. Case
20–CA–32142–1
March 31, 2005
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN BATTISTA AND MEMBERS LIEBMAN AND
SCHAUMBER
The General Counsel seeks a default 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 October 19 and
December 17, 2004, respectively, the General Counsel
issued the complaint on December 22, 2004 against
Holmberg Roofing, Inc., the Respondent, alleging that it
has violated Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act. The Re-
spondent failed to file an answer.
On January 21, 2005, the General Counsel filed a Mo-
tion for Default Judgment with the Board. On January
26, 2005, 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. On February 7, 2005,
the Union filed a Joinder in Motion for Default Judg-
ment. The Respondent filed no response. The allega-
tions in the motion are therefore undisputed.
Ruling on Motion for Default 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 stated
that unless an answer was filed by January 5, 2005, all
the allegations in the complaint could be considered ad-
mitted. Further, the undisputed allegations in the Gen-
eral Counsel’s motion disclose that the Region, by letter
dated January 6, 2005, notified the Respondent that
unless an answer was received by January 13, 2005, a
motion for default judgment would be filed.
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 default judgment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent, a California
corporation with an office and place of business in Peta-
luma, California (the Respondent’s facility), has been
engaged in the construction industry as a residential roof-
ing contractor.
During the 12-month period ending November 30,
2004, the Respondent, in conducting its business opera-
tions described above, derived gross revenues in excess
of $500,000 and purchased and received goods, supplies
and materials valued in excess of $5000 which originated
from points outside the State of California.
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 United Union of Roofers and Wa-
terproofers, Local 81, AFL–CIO (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, Alan Holmberg occupied the po-
sition of the Respondent’s president, and has been a su-
pervisor of the Respondent within the meaning of Sec-
tion 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
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All full-time and regular part-time journeyman roofers,
apprentice roofers and foreman roofers employed by
Holmberg Roofing, Inc., working out of its Petaluma,
California facility; excluding all other employees,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Since about October 2002, and at all material times,
the Union has been the designated exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of the unit, and since then the
Union has been recognized as the representative by the
Respondent. This recognition has been embodied in a
collective-bargaining agreement effective by its terms for
the period August 1, 2000 through July 31, 2005.
At all times since about October 2002, based on Sec-
tion 9(a) of the Act, the Union has been the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of the unit.
Since about September 3, 2004, the Union, by its at-
torney, has requested that the Respondent furnish the
Union with the following information:
1. All jobs performed January 1, 2004, through No-
vember 1, 2004;
2. Their locations;
3. The dates of those jobs;
4. The names of the workers on those jobs;
5. The nature of the jobs;
6. All employees employed by the Respondent from
January 1, 2004, through November 1, 2004;
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL RELATIONS BOARD LABOR 2
7. Their rates of pay;
8. Their job classifications;
9. Their dates of hire; and
10. The names of those terminated from January 1,
2004, through November 1, 2004, the reasons for their
termination, and the date each was terminated.
The information requested by the Union, as described
above, is necessary for, and relevant to, the Union’s per-
formance of its duties as the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of the unit.
Since about September 3, 2004, the Respondent, by
Alan Holmberg, has failed and refused to furnish the
Union with the information requested by it as described
above.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
By the conduct described above, the Respondent has
failed and refused to bargain collectively and in good
faith with the exclusive bargaining representative of its
employees, and has thereby 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 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 failed and refused to fur-
nish the Union information that is relevant and necessary
to its role as the exclusive bargaining representative of
the unit employees, we shall order the Respondent to
furnish the Union with the information it requested on
September 3, 2004.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Holmberg Roofing, Inc., Petaluma, Califor-
nia, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Failing and refusing to furnish United Union of
Roofers and Waterproofers, Local 81, AFL–CIO, with
information necessary for and relevant to the perform-
ance of its duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining
representative of the employees in the following appro-
priate unit:
All full-time and regular part-time journeyman roofers,
apprentice roofers and foreman roofers employed by
Holmberg Roofing, Inc., working out of its Petaluma,
California facility; excluding all other employees,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(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) Furnish the Union with the information it requested
on September 3, 2004.
(b) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Petaluma, California, copies of the attached
notice marked “Appendix.”1 Copies of the notice, on
forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 20,
after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized repre-
sentative, shall be posted by the Respondent and main-
tained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places,
including all places where notices to employees are cus-
tomarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the
Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material. In the event
that, during the pendency of these proceedings, the Re-
spondent has gone out of business or closed the facility
involved in these proceedings, the Respondent shall du-
plicate 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 September 3, 2004.
(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.
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

1 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.”
HOLMBERG ROOFING, INC. 3
Act together with other employees for your bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected
activities.
WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to furnish United Union of
Roofers and Waterproofers, Local 81, AFL–CIO, with
information necessary for and relevant to the perform-
ance of its duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining
representative of the employees in the following appro-
priate unit:
All full-time and regular part-time journeyman roofers,
apprentice roofers and foreman roofers employed by us,
working out of our Petaluma, California facility; exclud-
ing all other employees, guards and supervisors as de-
fined in the Act.
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 furnish the Union with the information it re-
quested on September 3, 2004.
HOLMBERG ROOFING, INC.