Horace E. Green Day Care Center

National Labor Relations Board - Administrative Judge Opinions

Jul 30, 2008

29-CA-028789 (N.L.R.B. Jul. 30, 2008)

JD(NY)-28-08
Brooklyn, NY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIVISION OF JUDGES
NEW YORK BRANCH OFFICE
HORACE E. GREEN DAY CARE CENTER
and Case No. 29-CA-28789
LOCAL 205, DISTRICT COUNCIL 1707,
AFSCME
Ashok C. Bokde, Brooklyn, NY, Counsel for the General Counsel.
DECISION
Statement of the Case
STEVEN DAVIS, Administrative Law Judge: Based on a charge filed on February 27,
2008 by Local 205, District Council 1707, AFSCME (Union), a complaint was issued on May 29,
2008 against Horace E. Green Day Care Center (Respondent). On June 15, 2008, a hearing
was held before me in Brooklyn, New York.
The complaint was duly served on the Respondent’s correct address and a return
receipt therefore was signed by an agent of the Respondent. The complaint advised, pursuant
to section 102.20 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations, that the Respondent must file an
answer to the complaint within 14 days of the service of the complaint, and that if it fails to do
so, all the allegations of the complaint shall be deemed by it to be admitted to be true and shall
be so found by the Board. The complaint advised that an answer thereto was required to be
filed on or before June 12, 2008.
No answer having been filed by June 12, counsel for the General Counsel sent a letter
by first class mail to the Respondent on June 13, 2008, informing it that he had voluntarily
extended its time to file an answer and further advising it, pursuant to Section 102.20 of the
Board’s Rules and Regulations that if an answer was not filed by June 19, 2008, a default
judgment would be sought.
At the hearing, no appearance was made by the Respondent, and counsel for the
General Counsel made a motion for default judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file
an answer. I granted the motion.
Based upon the fact that no answer was filed denying any of the allegations of the
complaint, all such allegations are deemed to be admitted to be true. Upon the evidence
presented in this proceeding, I make the following:
Findings of Fact
I. Jurisdiction
The complaint alleges and I find that the Respondent, a domestic corporation, having its
principal office and place of business at 600 Hart Street, Brooklyn, New York, has been
engaged in the business of providing infant day care services. During the past year, the
JD(NY)-28-08
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2
Respondent has derived gross revenues valued in excess of $250,000, and purchased and
received at its Brooklyn facility, goods and materials valued in excess of $5,000 directly from
suppliers located within New York State, which suppliers, in turn, purchased and received such
goods and materials directly from suppliers located outside New York State.1 I accordingly find
and conclude that the Respondent has been an employer engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(2), (6) and (7) of the Act. I also find that the Union is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
II. The Alleged Unfair Labor Practices
A. Section 8(a)(1) of the Act
The complaint alleges and I find that on about January 2, 2008, the Respondent, by
Bridget Erwat, its Executive Director and statutory supervisor (a) threatened its employees that
it was futile for them to seek assistance from the Union and (b) threatened to close its facility if
its employees sought the Union’s assistance.
The complaint alleges and I find that on about January 25, 2008, the Respondent, by
Irma Varner, its Chairperson of the Board of Directors and statutory supervisor, advised its
employees that the Respondent did not resolve employees’ complaints because they contacted
the Union.
The complaint alleges and I find that on about February 4, 2008, the Respondent, by
Bridget Erwat, told its employees that it was futile for them to seek assistance from the Union or
engage in other concerted activities.
B. Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act
The complaint alleges and I find that on or about the dates listed next to their names, the
Respondent disciplined the following employees:2
Alda Valdez January 2, 2008
February 12, 2008
Linda Matias January 2, 2008
January 4, 2008
Hariette Williams January 4, 2008
Samina Lucky January 4, 2008
February 12, 2008
William Mendez January 14, 2008
Jessica Taveras February 14, 2008

1 A commerce questionnaire completed by the Respondent during the investigation of the
charge states that the Respondent has 32 employees and received gross revenue of
$1,000,000 from the performance of services.
2 This office was administratively advised that the discipline consisted of written memos or
letters placed in the employees’ files.
JD(NY)-28-08
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
3
I find, as alleged in the complaint, that the Respondent engaged in such conduct
because the employees named above engaged in Union activities, and to discourage
employees from engaging in such activities or other concerted activities for the purpose of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.
III. Conclusions of Law
By threatening employees as set forth above, and by advising employees that it did not
resolve employees’ complaints because they contacted the Union, the Respondent has
engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) and
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
By disciplining employees as set forth above, the Respondent has engaged in unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) and Section
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
Remedy
Having found that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act, I shall
order it to cease and desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the
policies of the Act. I shall recommend that the letters of discipline shall be expunged from the
employees’ files and that they should not be used against them in any way.
On these findings of fact and conclusions of law and on the entire record, I issue the
following recommended3
ORDER
The Respondent, Horace E. Green Day Care Center, its officers, agents, successors,
and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) threatening its employees that it was futile for them to seek assistance from Local
205, District Council 1707, AFSCME.
(b) threatening to close its facility if its employees sought the Union’s assistance.
(c) advising its employees that it did not resolve its employees’ complaints because they
contacted the Union.
(d) telling its employees that it was futile for them to seek assistance from the Union or
engage in other concerted activities.
(e) disciplining its employees because they engaged in Union activities, and to

3 If no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec. 102.46 of the Board’s Rules and
Regulations, the findings, conclusions, and recommended Order shall, as provided in Sec.
102.48 of the Rules, be adopted by the Board and all objections to them shall be deemed
waived for all purposes.
JD(NY)-28-08
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
4
discourage its employees from engaging in such activities or other concerted activities for the
purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.
(f) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, 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) Rescind the discipline issued to Aida Valdez on January 2, 2008 and February 12,
2008.
(b) Rescind the discipline issued to Linda Matias on January 2, 2008 and January 4,
2008.
(c) Rescind the discipline issued to Hariette Williams on January 4, 2008.
(d) Rescind the discipline issued to Samina Lucky January 4, 2008 and February 12,
2008.
(e) Rescind the discipline issued to William Mendez on January 12, 2008.
(f) Rescind the discipline issued to Jessica Taveras on February 14, 2008.
(g) Within 14 days from the date of the Board’s Order, remove from its files any
reference to the unlawful discipline imposed on the above employees, and within 3 days
thereafter notify the employees in writing that this has been done and that the discipline will not
be used against them in any way.
(h) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at its facility in Brooklyn, NY, copies
of the attached notice marked “Appendix.”4 Copies of the notice, on forms provided by the
Regional Director for Region 29, 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 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 Respondent 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 2, 2008.

4 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 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.”
JD(NY)-28-08
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
5
(i) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file with the Regional Director a sworn
certification of a responsible official on a form provided by the Region attesting to the steps that
the Respondent has taken to comply.
Dated, Washington, D.C., July 30, 2008
____________________
Steven Davis
Administrative Law Judge
JD(NY)-28-08
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
6
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 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 benefit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected activities
WE WILL NOT threaten you that it was futile for you to seek assistance from Local 205, District
Council 1707, AFSCME.
WE WILL NOT threaten to close our facility if you seek the Union’s assistance.
WE WILL NOT advise you that we did not resolve your complaints because you contacted the
Union.
WE WILL NOT tell you that it was futile for you to seek assistance from the Union or engage in
other concerted activities.
WE WILL NOT discipline you because you engaged in Union activities, and to discourage you
from engaging in such activities or other 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 you in the
exercise of the rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL rescind the discipline issued to Aida Valdez on January 2, 2008 and February 12,
2008.
WE WILL rescind the discipline issued to Linda Matias on January 2, 2008 and January 4, 2008.
WE WILL rescind the discipline issued to Hariette Williams on January 4, 2008.
WE WILL rescind the discipline issued to Samina Lucky January 4, 2008 and February 12,
2008.
WE WILL rescind the discipline issued to William Mendez on January 12, 2008.
WE WILL rescind the discipline issued to Jessica Taveras on February 14, 2008.
WE WILL within 14 days from the date of the Board’s Order, remove from our files any
reference to the unlawful discipline imposed on the above employees, and within 3 days
JD(NY)-28-08
thereafter notify the employees in writing that this has been done and that the discipline will not
be used against them in any way.
HORACE E. GREEN DAY CARE CENTER
(Employer)
Dated By
(Representative) (Title)

The National Labor Relations Board is an independent Federal agency created in 1935 to enforce the National Labor
Relations Act. It conducts secret-ballot elections to determine whether employees want union representation and it
investigates and remedies unfair labor practices by employers and unions. To find out more about your rights under
the Act and how to file a charge or election petition, you may speak confidentially to any agent with the Board’s
Regional Office set forth below. You may also obtain information from the Board’s website: www.nlrb.gov.
Two Metro Tech Center – Suite 5100
Brooklyn, NY 11201-3838
Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
718-330-7713
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE
THIS NOTICE MUST REMAIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE OF POSTING AND MUST
NOT BE ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY OTHER MATERIAL. ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS
NOTICE OR COMPLIANCE WITH ITS PROVISIONS MAY BE DIRECTED TO THE ABOVE REGIONAL OFFICE’S
COMPLIANCE OFFICER, 718-330-2862.