Kasper Disposal Service

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 11, 1989

292 N.L.R.B. 265 (N.L.R.B. 1989)

KASPER DISPOSAL SERVICE
Kasper Disposal Service and Teamsters Local 945,
a/w International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Amer-
ica, AFL-CIO Case 22-CA-14371
January 11, 1989
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND
ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS
JOHANSEN AND CRACRAFT
On September 30, 1987, the National Labor Re
lations Board issued a Decision and Order in this
proceeding,' in which it ordered the Respondent,
inter alia, to make whole Sandra LePoidevin for
any loss of earnings and other benefits resulting
from the Respondent's unfair labor practices in vio
lation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act A con
troversy having arisen over the amount of backpay
due under the terms of the Board's Order, the Re-
gional Director for Region 22 issued and duly
served on the Respondent a backpay specification
and notice of hearing, alleging the amount of back
pay due The Respondent failed to file in answer
On April 13, 1988, the General Counsel filed
with the Board a Motion for Summary Judgment
based on the Respondent's failure to file an answer
On August 31, 1988, the Board issued an order de-
nying the General Counsel's Motion for Summary
Judgment,2 allowing the Respondent 14 additional
days to file an answer, and providing that the Gen
eral Counsel could renew its motion "should the
Respondent fail to file a timely, proper answer "
Thereafter, on September 20, 1988, the General
Counsel filed with the Board a renewed Motion for
Summary Judgment based on the Respondent's fail
ure to file an answer The Board issued an order
transferring the proceeding to the Board and a
Notice to Show Cause why the General Counsel's
motion should not be granted, giving the Respond-
ent until October 6, 1988, to file a response On
October 20, 1988, the Respondent filed its opposi
tion to the General Counsel's motion, alleging that
it filed an answer on September 15, 1988, and that
the Respondent's attorney simply could not have
humanely [sic] propounded the Answer any earlier
1 286 NLRB 14 (1987)
2 290 NLRB 1031 Member Johansen who dissented from the denial of
the General Counsels previous Motion for Summary Judgment in this
case agrees with his colleagues that even with the extension of time
granted in the prior decision the Respondent has failed to file a timely
answer and the General Counsels renewed Motion for Summary Judg
ment should be granted
265
in September ' On October 26, 1988, the General
Counsel filed a motion to reject the Respondent's
answer as untimely, and on November 2, 1988, the
General Counsel filed a brief in support of its
motion, noting that the answer was not filed until
September 20, 1988, and that the Respondent had
never requested an extension of time for filing its
answer
The National Labor Relations Board has delegat
ed its authority in this proceeding to a three
member panel
On the entire record in this case, the Board
makes the following
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
In its Order denying the General Counsel's
Motion for Summary Judgment, which issued on
August 31, 1988, the Board gave the Respondent
14 days from the date of the Order in which to file
its answer Thus, the Respondent's answer was to
have been filed in the Regional Office on or before
September 14, 1988 See Section 102 111 of the
Board's Rules and Regulations Even if we were to
accept the Respondent's response to the Board s
Notice to Show Cause, which was filed 2 weeks
after the date set in the Board's notice, the Re
spondent admittedly filed its answer to the backpay
specification no earlier than September 15, 1988 In
the absence of good cause being shown by the Re-
spondent for the failure to file a timely answer and
in light of our prior grant of a 2-week extension of
time to file an answer, we find the Respondent's
answer to be untimely and grant the General
Counsel's motion to reject the Respondent's
answer
Since we have rejected the Respondent's answer,
in accordance with the Board s Rules and Regula-
tions, the allegations of the backpay specification
are deemed to be admitted as true, and we further
grant the General Counsel's Motion for Summary
Judgment
Accordingly, the Board concludes that the net
backpay due the discriminatee is as stated in the
computations of the specification, and orders the
payment thereof by the Respondent to the discri
minatee
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that
the Respondent, Kasper Disposal Service, Annan
dale, New Jersey, its officers, agents, successors,
292 NLRB No 41
266 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and assigns , shall make whole the discriminatee , ed,3 and accrued to the date of payment , minus tax
Sandra LePoidevin , by payment to her in the withholdings required by Federal and state laws
amount of $ 15,768 51 , plus interest computed in the
manner prescribed in New Horizons for the Retard-
as set out in the 1986 amendment to 26 US C § 6621 Interest on
amounts accrued prior to January 1 1987 (the effective date of the 1986
3 283 NLRB 1173 (1987) Interest on and after January 1 1987 shall be amendment to 26 U S C § 6621) shall be computed in accordance with
computed at the short term Federal rate for the underpayment of taxes Florida Steel Corp 231 NLRB 651 (1977)