Lasolite Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 15, 1972

196 N.L.R.B. 1096 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

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.