Livingston Powered Metal, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 5, 1980

253 N.L.R.B. 577 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

I.IVINGSrON POWERED METAL, INC.
Livingston Powdered Metal, Inc. and International
Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agri-
cultural Implement Workers of America, UAW.
Case 10-CA-15795
December 5, 1980
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MMIAl sRS JNKINS, PI Ntl I.O0. AND
TRUISDAILIi
Upon a charge filed on May 6, 1980, by Interna-
tional Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
UAW, herein called the Union, and duly served on
Livingston Powdered Metal, Inc., herein called Re-
spondent, the General Counsel of the National
Labor Relations Board, by the Acting Regional Di-
rector for Region 10, issued a complaint and notice
of hearing on June 13, 1980, against Respondent,
alleging that Respondent had engaged in and was
engaging in unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5), (3),
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 an
administrative law judge were duly served on the
parties to this proceeding.
When no timely answer to the complaint was
filed, counsel for the General Counsel attempted
unsuccessfully to contact Respondent's attorney by
telephone on July 23 and 24, 1980.1 Thereafter,
counsel for the General Counsel, by letter dated
July 24, advised Respondent's attorney that no
answer to the complaint had been filed and that the
General Counsel would move for summary judg-
ment if Respondent did not respond to this notifi-
cation by July 30. By letter dated July 31, Re-
spondent requested an extension of time until
August 11 to file an answer.
The Acting Regional Director granted Respond-
ent's request on August 6, and advised Respondent
that summary judgment would not be sought if its
answer was filed no later than August 11. No
answer having been filed by Respondent by August
11, counsel for the General Counsel, on August 18,
filed directly with the Board a Motion To Transfer
Case to and Continue Proceedings before the
Board and for Summary Judgment, based on Re-
spondent's failure to file an answer to the com-
plaint as required by Section 102.20 of the Board's
Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended.
Thereafter, on August 25, the Board issued an
order transferring the proceeding to the Board and
a Notice To Show Cause why the General Coun-
' Unless olherw i rno led. .ll dater herein are i 1980()
sel's Motion for Summary Judgment should not be
granted.
On September 10, Respondent filed its answer to
the Notice To Show Cause in which Respondent's
counsel asserts that Respondent, by letter dated
August 8 which was placed in the mail on August
11, submitted an answer to the complaint within
the extended period of time granted by the Acting
Regional Director, and that this answer was re-
ceived by the Acting Regional Director on August
18, after the General Counsel's Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment had been forwarded to the Board.
Respondent's counsel also asserts that Respondent
served the Union with a copy of the answer which
was placed in the mail on August 11 and received
by the Union on August 13. Respondent contends
that it cannot be held responsible for the lack of
prompt delivery by the United States Postal Serv-
ice. Moreover, in specific response to the com-
plaint, Respondent denies that it committed any
unfair labor practices, avers that economic condi-
tions in the industry did not permit the continu-
ation of its manufacturing operations at any loca-
tion, and contends that these facts would be shown
at a hearing in this matter. On this basis, Respond-
ent submits that it has met the procedural require-
ments of the Board, that the Motion for Summary
Judgment should be denied, and that the case
should be heard before an administrative law
judge.
On September 22, counsel for the General Coun-
sel filed a motion to strike the answer to the com-
plaint and a response to Respondent's answer to
the Notice To Show Cause, contending that, by its
answer to the Notice To Show Cause, Respondent
admits that it did not mail its answer until August
11, and that therefore Respondent's lack of dili-
gence, rather than the Postal Service, made timely
service impossible.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following:
Ruling on the Motion To Strike Respondent's
Answer
In its reply to the Notice To Show Cause, Re-
spondent does not deny service of the charge, com-
plaint, and notice of hearing, or the granting of the
extension of time to file an answer. Respondent as-
serts, however, that its answer was timely filed be-
cause it was placed in the mail by the deadline set
forth in the Acting Regional Director's August 6
letter. We find no merit in this contention. Section
253 NLRB No. 73
577
DECISIONS OF' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
102.114(b) of the Rules and Regulations of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board, Series 8, as amended,
states:
When the act or any of these rules require the
filing of a motion, brief, exception, or any
other paper in any proceeding, such document
must be received by the Board or the officer
or agent designated to receive such matter
before the close of business of the last day of
the time limit, if any, for such filing or exten-
sion of time that may have been granted.
As Respondent's answer was not received by the
Regional Director before the close of business on
August 11, we find that the answer was not timely
filed. Nor could Respondent reasonably have ex-
pected its answer to be filed by August I1, since it
placed the answer in the mail on that date.2
Accordingly, we find that Respondent's answer
is untimely, improper, and does not comply with
the requirements of Section 102.20 of the Board's
Rules and Regulations. We further find that Re-
spondent's explanation with respect thereto does
not constitute good cause within the meaning of
said rule. Therefore, we grant the General Coun-
sel's motion to strike the answer.3
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides as follows:
The respondent shall, within 10 days from the
service of the complaint, file an answer there-
to. The respondent shall specifically admit,
deny, or explain each of the facts alleged in
the complaint, unless the respondent is without
knowledge, in which case the respondent shall
so state, such statement operating as a denial.
All allegations in the complaint, if no answer
is filed, or any allegation in the complaint not
specifically denied or explained in an answer
filed, unless the respondent shall state in the
answer that he is without knowledge, shall be
deemed to be admitted to b'e true and shall be
so found by the Board, unless good cause to
the contrary is shown.
The complaint and notice of hearing served on
Respondent specifically stated that unless an
answer is filed to the complaint within 10 days
2 In Sig Wold Storage & Transfer, 2(15 NLRB 378 (1973), the Board
considered the timeliness of the filing of objections in a representation
case, and found that such filing was untimely where the objections were
not timely received by the regional office nor could it reasonably be as-
sumed that the objections would be timely delivered. Cf. Rio de Oro Urua-
nium Mines. Inc., 119 NLRB 153 (1957), also a representation case
wherein the filing party could reasonably have assumed that its actions
would have effected timely delivery.
:' Neal R. Sol Commditle, Inc. 238 NLRB 32 (1978).
from the service thereof "all of the allegations in
the complaint shall be deemed to be admitted to be
true and may be so found by the Board." Further,
according to the Motion for Summary Judgment,
the Acting Regional Director for Region 10, pursu-
ant to Section 102.22 of the Board's Rules and
Regulations, informed Respondent that summary
judgment would not be sought if Respondent filed
an answer by August 11. Respondent failed to
timely file a valid answer to the complaint. There-
after, on August 18, a timely answer not having
been filed, counsel for the General Counsel filed
the instant Motion for Summary Judgment.
As Respondent has not filed an answer accept-
able under the Board's Rules and Regulations
within 10 days from the service of the complaint,
or within the extended time afforded it by the
Acting Regional Director, and as no good cause
for its failure to do so has been shown, in accord-
ance with the rule set forth above, the allegations
of the complaint herein stand undenied and are
deemed to be admitted to be true, and are so found
to be true. Accordingly, we grant the General
Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the basis of the entire record, the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT
Respondent Livingston Powdered Metal, Inc., is,
and has been at all times material herein, a Tennes-
see corporation with offices and places of business
located in Livingston, Tennessee, hereinafter called
the Livingston plant, and Brockway, Pennsylvania,
hereinafter called the Brockway plant, where it is
engaged in the manufacturing of powdered metal
products. During the past 12 months, which period
is representative of its operations at all times mate-
rial herein, Respondent has sold and shipped from
the Livingston plant goods valued in excess of
$50,000 directly to customers located outside the
State of Tennessee.
We find, based on the foregoing, that Respond-
ent is, and has been at all times material herein, an
employer engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that it
will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert ju-
risdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aero-
space and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, UAW, is a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
578
LIVINGSTON POWERED METAL.. INC
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The 8(a)(5) and (1) Violations
The following employees of Respondent consti-
tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b)
of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees
employed by Respondent at its Livingston
plant, but excluding office clerical employees,
professional employees, guards and supervisors
as defined in the Act.
On February 5, in a secret-ballot election con-
ducted under the supervision of the Regional Di-
rector for Region 10, a majority of the employees
in the above-described unit designated the Union as
their representative for the purposes of collective
bargaining with Respondent. On February 13, the
Regional Director for Region 10 of the Board cer-
tified the Union as the exclusive collective-bargain-
ing representative of the employees in the above-
described unit.
On or about March 5 and March 18, and at all
times thereafter, the Union requested Respondent
to bargain collectively with it as the exclusive bar-
gaining representative of all the employees in the
appropriate unit with respect to rates of pay,
wages, hours of employment, and other terms and
conditions of employment. Additionally, on or
about March 5, the Union requested Respondent to
make available to it for its use in collective bar-
gaining with Respondent certain relevant and nec-
essary baragaining information, including "the clas-
sifications, rates of pay, insurance benefits, any pen-
sion plan that is now in effect and the seniority
dates of all employees." Since on or about March
12, and continuing to date, Respondent has failed
and refused, and continues to fail and refuse, to
bargain collectively with the Union as the exclu-
sive bargaining representative of the unit employ-
ees, and to furnish and make available to the Union
the requested relevant and necessary bargaining in-
formation.
Additionally, on or about March 25, Respondent
unilaterally, without notice to or consultation with
the Union, closed its Livingston plant and trans-
ferred the work that had been performed by the
unit employees to the Brockway plant. On or about
March 18, the Union requested Respondent to bar-
gain collectively with it as the exclusive repre-
sentative of all the employees in the appropriate
unit with respect to the effects on its employees of
the close and transfer of operations from its Living-
ston plant to its Brockway plant. On or about
March 18, and at all times thereafter, Respondent
refused, and has continued to refuse, to bargain
collectively with the Union as requested.
Accordingly, we find that by the aforesaid con-
duct Respondent has (1) since on or about March
12 refused to bargain with the Union as the exclu-
sive representative of the employees in the appro-
priate unit; and (2) refused to furnish the Union
with certain relevant and necessary bargaining in-
formation; and (3) closed the Livingston plant, and
transferred the work to the Brockway plant, with-
out bargaining with the Union over the decision to
close or the effects of the closing. By such actions,
we conclude, Respondent has engaged in and is en-
gaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning
of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
B. The 8(a)(3) and (I) Violations
On or about February 1, Respondent withheld
from its employees the wage increase granted them
on or about February 1, because of their member-
ship in, and concerted activities on behalf of, the
Union, and because they engaged in concerted ac-
tivities for the purposes of collective bargaining or
for other mutual aid and protection.
Commencing or about March 14, Respondent
discharged the following named employees, and
other employees whose names are not known, em-
ployed at the Livingston plant, because of their
membership in, and other concerted activities on
behalf of, the Union, and because they engaged in
concerted activities for the purposes of collective
bargaining or for other mutual aid and protection:
Walter Bonne
Grady Maxfield
David Stafford
Larry K. Brown
Nevins Pennycuff
Phillip Walker
Billy J. Sells
Tommy Sells
Johnny Abbott
Jimmy Smith
David Boswell
Benny Maxfield
Johnny Dishman
Keith Sells
Gerald Carter
Ruey Honeycutt
Terry Brown
Willie White
Alan Key
Earl Ray Boles
Billy Hancock
David Beaty
Timmy J. Dillon
William Richard Jones
Richard Crouch
Calvin Short
Dana Reed
David Mayberry
Ronnie Bull
Herman Flowers
Donna Abbott
Roger Phillips
Randell Swearingin
Joyce Maynard
R. L. Murphy
Amos Bilbrey
Bruce Gaw
Leon Flatt
Lawrence Smith
Billy Dishman
Freddie Key
John Robbins
Ewert Padgett
William Winningham
Carl Coffman
Charles Lee Ramsey, Jr.
579
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Ronnie D. Melton
Estle McCowan
Jerry Gilpatrick
Luther Boone
Cleo Carmack
Donnie Phillips
Lois Jackson
Milton Maxfield
Donald Ford
Edward Hummel
Ova Robbins
Rita Melton
A. B. Webb
Thomas Norris
Dwight Ferrell
James Bowers
Charles Conaster
Mark Bilbrey
Brenda Moore
Phillis K. Reagan
Helen Carr
Ruby Speck
Carlos Pardue
Obsy Turner
Teddy Turner
Bobby Cravens
Ann McCormick
Haskel Cox
Linda Glasscock
Jimmy Brown
McCoy McDonald
Charlie Hummel
Larry Garrett
Sarah Randolph
Shernie Ledbetter
Harlie McCowan
David Robbins
Donnie Webb
Mark Wilson
Larry Padgett
Richard Huddleston
Carolyn Sue Thompson
Nancy Tackett
Jessie Dishman
Janetta Sells
At all times since on or about March 14, Respond-
ent has failed and refused, and continues to fail and
refuse, to reinstate the above-mentioned employees
to their former positions or, if such positions no
longer exist, to substantially equivalent positions.
On or about March 25, Respondent, unilaterally
without notice to or consultation with the Union,
closed its operations at its Livingston plant and
transferred said operations to its Brockway plant,
because of its employees' membership in, and activ-
ities on behalf of, the Union, and because they en-
gaged in concerted activities with other employees
for the purpose of collective bargaining and other
mutual aid and protection.
Accordingly, we find that, by the aforesaid con-
duct, Respondent has discriminated in regard to
terms and conditions of employment of its employ-
ees, thereby discouraging membership in the
Union, and that by such conduct Respondent has
engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the
Act.
C. The 8(a)(1) Violations
At all times material herein, Robert A. Clyde oc-
cupied the position of president of Respondent and
has been, and is now, an agent of Respondent,
acting on its behalf, and is a supervisor within the
meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act.
Since on or about October 1, 1979, the Union
has been engaged in an organizational campaign
among Respondent's employees at the Livingston
plant. On or about February 1, 1980, Clyde threat-
ened Respondent's employees that Respondent
would close the Livingston plant if its employees
joined, or engaged in activities on behalf of, the
Union. Also, on or about February 1, Clyde prom-
ised Respondent's employees that Respondent
would remedy employee grievances concerning
jobs and working conditions. Also on or about that
date, Clyde granted all Respondent's employees at
the Livingston plant a wage increase. Respondent,
through its agent Clyde, engaged in the above-de-
scribed conduct at a time when it had knowledge
of the Union's organizational campaign and for the
purpose of causing its employees to reject the
Union as their collective-bargaining representative.
We find that, by the conduct described in the
above paragraph, Respondent has interfered with,
restrained, and coerced employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed them under Section 7 of
the Act, and that by such conduct has engaged in,
and is engaging in, unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(l) of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR
PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent set forth in section
III, above, occurring in connection with its oper-
ations described in section I, above, have a close,
intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traf-
fic, and commerce among the several States and
tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and ob-
structing commerce and the free flow of com-
merce.
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), (3), and (1) of the Act,
we shall order that Respondent cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action de-
signed to effectuate the policies of the Act.
To remedy Respondent's violations of Section
8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall order that Re-
spondent, upon request, meet and bargain with the
Union as the exclusive representative of its employ-
ees, provide the Union with the relevant and neces-
sary bargaining information as requested, and bar-
gain with the Union, upon request, over any future
decision to close its Livingston plant or over the
effects of such closing.
To remedy Respondent's violations of Section
8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act, we shall order that Re-
spondent restore the wage increase it refused its
employees on or about February 1. Additionally,
we shall order Respondent to restore the status quo
ante by reopening the Livingston plant and by of-
fering the terminated bargaining unit employees re-
580
LIVINGSTON POWERED METAL. INC.
instatement to the positions which they held prior
to their unlawful termination or, if such positions
no longer exist, to substantially equivalent posi-
tions, without prejudice to their seniority or other
rights and privileges. We shall also order Respond-
ent to make the unlawfully discharged employees
whole for any loss of earnings they may have suf-
fered because of the discrimination against them, to
be computed in accordance with the formula ap-
proved in F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB
289 (1950). Interest thereon is to be computed in
the manner prescribed in Florida Steel Corporation,
231 NLRB 651 (1977). 4
To remedy Respondent's violations of Section
8(a)(l) of the Act, we shall order that Respondent
cease and desist from such actions.
Having found that the unfair labor practices
committed by Respondent were of such an egre-
gious nature as to demonstrate a general disregard
for employees' fundamental statutory rights, we
shall also order Respondent to cease and desist
from infringing in any other manner upon the
rights of employees guaranteed by Section 7 of the
Act. 5
The Board, on the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Livingston Powdered Metal, Inc., is an em-
ployer engaged in commerce within the meaning of
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. International Union, United Automobile,
Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, UAW, is a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. Robert A. Clyde is a supervisor and agent of
Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(11) of
the Act.
4. All production and maintenance employees
employed by Respondent at its Livingston, Tennes-
see, plant, but excluding office clerical employees,
professional employees, guards and supervisors as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.
5. At all times material herein, the Union has
been the exclusive representative of all the employ-
ees in the aforesaid appropriate unit for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9(a) of the Act.
6. By the acts described in section III, A, above,
Respondent has refused to bargain collectively
4 See, generally. Isis Plumbing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962).
Member Jenkins would award interest on the backpay due in accordance
with the formula set forth in his partial dissent in Olympic Medical Corpo-
ration, 250 NLRB 146 (1980).
Hickmort Foods, Inc., 242 NLRB 1357 (1979).
with the above-named labor organization as the ex-
clusive bargaining representative of all the employ-
ees in the appropriate bargaining unit described
above, and thereby has engaged in unfair labor
practices in violations of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of
the Act.
7. By the acts described in section III, B, above,
Respondent has discriminated in regard to hire and
tenure of employment of its employees, thereby
discouraging membership in or activities on behalf
of a labor organization, and thereby has engaged in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act.
8. By the acts described in section III, C, above,
Respondent has interfered with, restrained, and co-
erced, and is interfering with, restraining, and co-
ercing, employees in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act, and there-
by has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(l) of
the Act.
9. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practies affecting commerce within the mean-
ing 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 Re-
lations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Livingston Powdered Metal, Inc., Livingston, Ten-
nessee, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Interna-
tional Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
UAW, as the exclusive representative of Respond-
ent's employees in the appropriate unit with respect
to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment.
(b) Failing and refusing to provide the Union
with relevant and necessary bargaining informa-
tion.
(c) Failing and refusing to bargain collectively
with the Union concerning the decision to close its
Livingston plant, or concerning the effects on the
unit employees of the decision to close the Living-
ston plant.
(d) Discouraging membership in the Union, or
any other labor organization, by refusing to pay
the unit employees a promised wage increase be-
cause of their membership in, or concerted activi-
ties on behalf of, that labor organization.
(e) Discouraging membership in the Union, or
any other labor organization, by closing its Living-
ston plant, transferring the work that had been per-
581
DECISIONS OF NATIO()NAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
formed by the unit employees to its Brockway
plant, and discharging its employees at the Living-
ston plant.
(f) Threatening its employees that Respondent
would close its Livingston plant if its employees
joined, or engaged in activities on behalf of, the
Union.
(g) Promising its employees that Respondent
would remedy employee grievances concerning
jobs and working conditions, or granting its em-
ployees a wage increase, at a time when Respond-
ent had knowledge of the Union's organizational
campaign and for the purpose of causing its em-
ployees to reject the Union as their collective-bar-
gaining representative.
(h) In any other manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action designed
to effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Upon request, bargain with International
Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agri-
cultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, as
the exclusive representative of its employees in the
appropriate unit with respect to rates of pay,
wages, hours, or other terms and conditions of em-
ployment and, if an understanding is reached,
embody such understanding in a signed agreement.
The appropriate unit is:
All production and maintenance employees
employed by Respondent at its Livingston
plant, but excluding office clerical employees,
professional employees, guards and supervisors
as defined the Act.
(b) Provide the relevant and necessary bargain-
ing information requested by the Union.
(c) Upon request, bargain with International
Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agri-
cultural Implement Workers of America, UAW,
concerning Respondent's decision to close its Liv-
ingston plant, or the effects of such closing on the
employees in the bargaining unit.
(d) Make each of the unit employees whole for
any loss of pay that they may have suffered by Re-
spondent's refusal to pay a promised wage increase,
as set forth in the section of the Decision entitled
"The Remedy."
(e) Reopen the Livingston plant and reinstate un-
lawfully terminated employees to the positions they
held before their unlawful termination or, if those
positions no longer exist, to substantially equivalent
positions, without prejudice to their seniority or
other rights and privileges and make them whole
for any loss of earnings or other benefits resulting
from Respondent's unlawful termination of them in
the manner set forth in the section of this Decision
entitled "The Remedy."
(f) Preserve and, upon request, make available to
the Board or its agents, for examination and copy-
ing, all payroll records, social security payment re-
cords, timecards, personnel records and reports,
and all other records necessary to analyze the
amount of backpay due under the terms of this
Order.
(g) Post at its Livingston, Tennessee, plant
copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 6
Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the
Regional Director for Region 10, after being duly
signed by Respondent's representative, shall be
posted by Respondent immediately upon receipt
thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive
days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all
places where notices to employees are customarily
posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Re-
spondent to insure that said notices are not altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
(h) Notify the Regional Director for Region 10,
in writing, within 20 days from the date of this
Order, what steps Respondent has taken to comply
herewith.
6 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 read "Posted Pursu-
ant 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, upon request, to bar-
gain collectively concerning rates of pay,
wages, hours, or other terms or conditions of
employment with International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Im-
plement Workers of America, UAW, as the
exclusive representative of the employees in
the following unit:
All production and maintenance employees
employed at the Employer's Livingston,
Tennessee, plant, but excluding office cleri-
cal employees, professional employees,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
WE WILL NOT refuse to provide the Union
with the relevant and necessary bargaining in-
formation requested by it.
WE WILL NOT refuse, upon request, to bar-
gain collectively concerning the decision to
582
LIVINGSTON POWERED METAL. INC.
close our Livingston, Tennessee, plant or the
effects of such decision with the above-named
Union as the exclusive bargaining representa-
tive of our employees in the bargaining unit
described above.
WE WILl NOT refuse to provide our em-
ployees with a promised wage increase be-
cause of their membership in, or concerted ac-
tivities on behalf of, the above-named Union
or any other labor organization.
WE WILL NOT discharge employees or oth-
erwise discriminate against them with respect
to their tenure of employment or any term or
condition of employment because of their
membership in, or concerted activities on
behalf of, the above-named Union or any other
labor organization.
WE WILL NOT threaten our employees with
plant closure for engaging in activities in sup-
port of International Union, United Auto-
mobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement
Workers of America, UAW, or any other
labor organization.
WE Wll L NOT promise our employees that
we will remedy employee grievances concern-
ing jobs and working conditions for the pur-
pose of inducing them to vote against the
above-named Union or any other labor organi-
zation.
WE WILL NOT grant our employees a wage
increase for the purpose of inducing them to
vote against the above-named Union or any
other labor organization.
WE WILL. NOT in any other manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the
exercise of the rights guaranteed them in Sec-
tion 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, upon request, bargain collectively
with the above-named Union as the exclusive
bargaining representative of our employees in
the appropriate unit described above with re-
spect to rates of pay, wages, hours, or other
terms and conditions of employment and, if an
understanding is reached, embody such under-
standing in a signed agreement.
WE WILI. provide the Union with the rele-
vant and necessary bargaining information re-
quested by it.
WE WIL., upon request, bargain with the
above-named Union as the exclusive bargain-
ing representative of all employees in the bar-
gaining unit described above, concerning our
decision to close our Livingston, Tennessee,
plant, or concerning the effects of that closing
on the employees in the appropriate unit.
WE WILL make our employees whole for
any loss of pay caused by our refusal to pay a
promised wage increase, with interest.
WE WILL reopen our Livingston, Tennessee,
plant and reinstate unlawfully terminated em-
ployees in the appropriate unit described
above to the positions they held before their
unlawful terminations or, if those positions no
longer exist, to substantially equivalent posi-
tions, without prejudice to their seniority or
other rights or privileges, and WE WILL make
them whole for any loss of earnings or other
benefits resulting from our unlawful termina-
tion of them, with interest.
LIVINGSTON POWDERED METAL,
INC.
583