Lasolite Corp.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 15, 1972196 N.L.R.B. 1096 (N.L.R.B. 1972) Copy Citation 1096 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Lasolite Corporation and District 65, Wholesale, Re- tail, Office & Processing Union, National Council Distributive Workers of America , Alliance for Labor Action . Case 2-CA-12509 May 15, 1972 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND KENNEDY Upon a charge filed on November 16, 1971, by District 65, Wholesale, Retail, Office & Processing Union, National Council Distributive Workers of America, Alliance for Labor Action, herein called the Union, and duly served on the Lasolite Corporation, herein called the Respondent, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 2, issued a complaint on Decem- ber 8, 1971, against Respondent, alleging that Re- spondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge, complaint, and notice of hearing before a Trial Examiner were duly served on the parties to this proceeding. In substance, the complaint alleges that the Union was duly certified on or about October 5, 1971, as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Respondent's employees in the unit found appropri- ate, following an election held pursuant to an agree- ment for consent election between the parties; and that since the Union's request on October 20, 1971, the Respondent has refused, and continues to refuse, to bargain in good faith with the Union about wages, hours, working conditions, and related matters. The Respondent failed to file an answer to the complaint, within the time provided by Board Rules and Regula- tions, Section 102.20. On or about January 31, 1972, counsel for the General Counsel advised the Respondent's attorney that a default judgment would be sought if no answer were filed. Having received neither an answer nor any further communication from the Respondent, counsel for the General Coun- sel filed a Motion for Summary Judgment directly with the Board on February 16, 1972. The Board subsequently issued an order transfer- ring the porceeding to the Board and a notice to show cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Summa- ry Judgment should not be granted. In response to the notice, the Respondent sent a letter to the Board as- serting it had agreed to negotiate with the Union on March 8 and that Board proceedings thus should be suspended. The Union sent a letter admitting the agreement to negotiate but arguing that the Board was not precluded from granting the motion since negotiations had not begun. In a reply in opposition to Respondent's response, counsel for the General Counsel pointed out that an order to bargain would not hinder the parties in reaching an agreement and noted that the Respondent's argument was only fur- ther indication of its "frivolous" attitude toward its collective-bargaining obligations. On March 15, 1972, the Union sent a second letter to inform the Board that the Respondent again had refused to bargain when the union representatives presented themselves at the Respondent's office for negotiations as previ- ously agreed upon. Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment The Board Rules and Regulations, Section 102.20, provides that "[aJll allegations in the complaint, if no answer is filed ... shall be deemed to be admitted to be true and shall be so found by the Board, unless good cause to the contrary is shown." As noted, no answer has been filed by the Respondent. The Respondent's letter asserting an agreement to nego- tiate does not establish good cause against granting the motion in view of the complaint's allegation, un- contested by Respondent, that Respondent had there- tofore, during an earlier period, unlawfully refused to bargain with the Union. In any event, it does not appear even from Respondent's most recent response that the Respondent has actually entered into good- faith bargaining with the Union. As counsel for the General Counsel points out, an order to bargain will not hinder the bargaining process but instead will aid it by compelling the Respondent to negotiate with the certified representative of the employees. According- ly, we find the facts alleged in the complaint to be true and grant the Motion for Summary Judgment. On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT The Respondent is a New York corporation en- gaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of glass lighting fixtures at its plant and place of busi- ness, 718 Broadway, New York, New York. During the past year, a period representative of its annual operations, the Respondent manufactured, sold, and distributed products valued in excess of $100,000. Products valued in excess of $50,000 were furnished to Royal Antiques, an enterprise that annually pur- chases goods valued in excess of $50,000 from outside the State of New York. 196 NLRB No. 163 LASOLITE CORPORATION 1097 We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Respon- dent is, and has been at all times material herein, an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that it will effectu- ate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of the employees in the ap- propriate unit, and that, by such refusal, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac- tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED District 65, Wholesale, Retail, Office & Processing Union, National Council Distributive Workers of America, Alliance for Labor Action is a labor organi- zation within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. The Representation Proceeding 1. The unit The following employees of the Respondent con- stitute a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining purposes within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All warehouse employees of the Respondent, employed at its plant, exclusive of all office cleri- cal employees, salesmen, watchmen, guards and supervisors as defined in Section 2(11) of the Act. 2. The certification On September 27, 1971, a majority of the employ- ees of Respondent in said unit, in a secret ballot elec- tion conducted under the supervision of the Regional Director for Region 2 designated the Union as their representative for the purpose of collective bargaining with the Respondent. The Union was certified as the collective-bargaining representative of the employees in said unit on October 5, 1971, and the Union contin- ues to be such exclusive representative within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. B. The Request To Bargain and Respondent's Refusal Commencing on or about October 20, 1971, and at all times thereafter, the Union has requested the Re- spondent to bargain collectively with it as the exclu- sive collective-bargaining representative of all the employees in the above-described unit. Commencing on or about October 20, 1971, and continuing at all times thereafter to date, the Respondent has refused, and continues to refuse, to recognize and bargain in good faith with the Union as the exclusive representa- tive for collective bargaining of all employees in said unit. Accordingly, we find that the Respondent has, since October 20, 1971, and at all times thereafter, IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III, above, occurring in connection with its operations described in section I, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and com- merce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY Having found that Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom, and, upon request, bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of all employees in the appro- priate unit, and, if an understanding is reached, em- body such understanding in a signed agreement. In order to insure that the employees in the appro- priate unit will be accorded the services of their select- ed bargaining agent for the period provided by law, we shall construe the initial period of certification as beginning on the date Respondent commences to bar- gain in good faith with the Union as the recognized bargaining representative in the appropriate unit. See Mar-Jac Poultry Company, Inc., 136 NLRB 785; Com- merce Company d/b/a Lamar Hotel, 140 NLRB 226, 229, enfd. 328 F.2d 600 (C.A. 5), cert. denied 379 U.S. 817; Burnett Construction Company, 149 NLRB 1419, 1421, enfd. 350 F.2d 57 (C.A. 10). The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts and the entire record, makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Lasolite Corporation is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. District 65, Wholesale, Retail, Office & Pro- cessing Union, National Council Distributive Work- ers of America, Alliance for Labor Action is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. All warehouse employees of the Respondent, em- ployed at its plant, exclusive of all office clerical em- ployees, salesmen, watchmen, guards and supervisors 1098 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD as defined in Section 2(11) of the Act constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act. 4. Since October 5, 1971, the above-named labor organization has been and now is the certified and exclusive representative of all employees in the afore- said appropriate unit for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. 5. By refusing on or about October 20, 1971, and at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively with the above-named labor organization as the exclusive bar- gaining representative of all the employees of Respon- dent in the appropriate unit, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) of the Act. 6. By the aforesaid refusal to bargain, Respondent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced, and is interfering with, restraining, and coercing, employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them in Section 7 of the Act, and thereby has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. 7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Rela- tions Board hereby orders that Respondent, Lasolite Corporation, its officers, agents, successors, and as- signs, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and condi- tions of employment with District 65, Wholesale, Re- tail, Office & Processing Union, National Council Distributive Workers of America, Alliance for Labor Action as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees in the following appropriate unit: All warehouse employees of the Respondent, employed at its plant, exclusive of all office cleri- cal employees, salesmen, watchmen, guards and supervisors as defined in Section 2(11) of the Act. (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Upon request, bargain with the above-named labor organization as the exclusive representative of all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, and, if an under- standing is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. (b) Post at its plant, 718 Broadway, New York, New York, copies of the attached notice marked "Appen- dix."' Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 2, after being duly signed by Respondent's representative, shall be post- ed by Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days there- after, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 2, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps have been taken to comply herewith. 1 In the event that 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 be changed to read "Posted Pursuant to a Judgment 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 WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively con- cerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with Dis- trict 65, Wholesale, Retail, Office & Processing Union, National Council Distributive Workers of America, Alliance for Labor Action, as the exclusive representative of the employees in the bargaining unit described below. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner in- terfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act. WE WILL, upon request, bargain with the above- named Union, as the exclusive representative of all employees in the bargaining unit described below, with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, and, if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. The bargaining unit is: All warehouse employees of the Respon- dent, employed at its plant, exclusive of all office clerical employees, salesmen, watch- LASOLITE CORPORATION 1099 men, guards and supervisors as defined in faced by anyone. Section 2(11) of the Act. This notice must remain posted for 60 consec- utive days from the date of posting and must not LASOLITE CORPORATION be altered, defaced, or covered by any other ma- (Employer) terial. Any questions concerning this notice or com- Dated By pliance with its provisions may be directed to the (Representative) (Title) Board's Office, 36th Floor, Federal Building, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10007, This is an official notice and must not be de- Telephone 212-264-3311. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation