Lynn, Janet, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 12, 1982

260 N.L.R.B. 189 (N.L.R.B. 1982)

JANET LYNN. INC
Janet Lynn, Inc. and New York Coat, Suit, Dress,
Rainwear & Allied Workers' Union, Interna-
tional Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, AFL-
CIO. Case 2-CA-18187
February 12, 1982
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN VAN I)D WATFIIR ANI)
MEMBERS FANNING AND HUNTER
Upon a charge filed on July 6, 1981, by New
York Coat, Suit, Dress, Rainwear & Allied Work-
ers' Union, International Ladies' Garment Workers'
Union, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union, and
duly served on Janet Lynn, Inc., herein called Re-
spondent, the General Counsel of the National
Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director
for Region 2, issued a complaint on August 20,
1981, against Respondent, alleging that Respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and
(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge
and complaint and notice of hearing before an ad-
ministrative law judge were duly served on the
parties to this proceeding. Respondent thereafter
failed to file an answer to the complaint.
On November 3, 1981, counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a Motion for
Summary Judgment based on Respondent's failure
to file an answer. Subsequently, on November 4,
1981, the Board issued an order transferring the
proceeding to the Board and a Notice To Show
Cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment should not be granted. Respondent
thereafter failed to file a response to the Notice To
Show Cause and the allegations in the Motion for
Summary Judgment accordingly stand uncontro-
verted.
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 for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides:
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.
260 NLRB No. 27
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 be 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 Re-
spondent herein specifically states that unless an
answer to the complaint is filed within 10 days of
service thereof "all of the allegations in the com-
plaint shall be deemed to be admitted to be true
and shall be so found by the Board." Further, ac-
cording to the uncontroverted allegations of the
Motion for Summary Judgment, Respondent was
duly served with the complaint and notice of hear-
ing on August 20, 1981, but failed to file an
answer. Thereafter, by letter of September 23,
1981, which was duly served on Respondent, the
General Counsel informed Respondent that it in-
tended to move for summary judgment since no
answer had been filed. However, the General
Counsel indicated that an answer could be filed by
October 8, 1981, with an accompanying explana-
tion for the delay in filing the answer. Respondent
has thereafter failed to file an answer and, as noted
above, Respondent has also failed to file a response
to the Notice To Show Cause. Accordingly, under
the rule set forth above, no good cause having
been shown for the failure to file an answer to the
complaint, the allegations of the complaint are
deemed admitted and found to be true, and 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 is, and has been at all times material
herein, a New York corporation with its principal
office and place of business in the Bronx, New
York. Respondent is engaged in the manufacture
and nonretail sales and distribution of ladies' cloth-
ing and related products. Respondent, in the course
and conduct of its business operations, annually
provides services valued in excess of $50,000 to
various enterprises within the State of New York,
which are, in turn, directly engaged in interstate
commerce, meeting one of the Board's standards
for the assertion of jurisdiction exclusive of indirect
outflow or indirect inflow.
189
DECISIONS (OF NATIONAl. LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Re-
spondent is, and has been at all times material
herein, an employer engaged in commerce within
the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act,
and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to
assert jurisdiction herein.
11. TIHI LABOR ORGANIZAT'IION INVOL.VIDI
New York Coat, Suit, Dress, Rainwear & Allied
Workers' Union, International Ladies' Garment
Workers' Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
111. 'THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
On or about June 29, 1981, Respondent, acting
through its statutory supervisor and agent, Eliza-
beth Figuero, at its Bronx, New York, facility, in-
terrogated its employees concerning their member-
ship in, activities on behalf of, and sympathy for
the Union, and also threatened its employees with
discharge if they joined, supported, or assisted the
Union. We find that by the aforesaid conduct Re-
spondent has interfered with, restrained, and co-
erced its employees in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed them under Section 7 of the Act and
that, by such conduct, Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
On or about June 29, 1981, Respondent dis-
charged its employee Carmen Cruz and since that
date has failed and refuse to reinstate, or to offer to
reinstate, her to her former position of employ-
ment. Respondent discharged Cruz and has since
failed to reinstate her, or to offer her reinstatement,
because she joined, supported, or assisted the
Union, and in order to discourage employees from
engaging in union activities or other concerted ac-
tivities for the purpose of collective bargaining or
other mutual aid or protection. By such conduct,
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 has
discriminated, and is discriminating, in regard to
the hire or tenure or terms or conditions of em-
ployment of its employees, thereby discouraging
membership in a labor organization, and Respond-
ent thereby has been engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and (1)
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 commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the
Act.
V. THE REMEI)Y
Having found that Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(l), and Section 8(a)(3) and
(1) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and
desist therefrom, and take certain affirmative action
designed to effectuate the policies of the Act.
Having found that Respondent discharged and
refused to reinstate Carmen Cruz, we shall order
that Respondent offer Cruz immediate and full re-
instatement to her former position, or, if such posi-
tion no longer exists, to a substantially equivalent
position without prejudice to her seniority and
other rights and privileges previously enjoyed. We
shall also order that Respondent make Carmen
Cruz whole for any loss of pay she may have suf-
fered because of her unlawful discharge, such back-
pay to be computed in accordance with F. W.
Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289 (1950), with in-
terest to be computed as prescribed in Florida Steel
Corporation, 231 NLRB 651 (1977). See, generally,
Isis Plumbing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962).
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following:
CONCI.USIONS OF LAW
1. Respondent, Janet Lynn, Inc., is an employer
engaged in commerce within the meaning of Sec-
tion 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. The Union is a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. By interrogating its employees about their
union activities and by threatening its employees
with discharge if they joined, supported, or assisted
the Union, Respondent violated Section 8(a)(l) of
the Act.
4. By discharging and refusing to reinstate em-
ployee Carmen Cruz because she engaged in union
activities, Respondent has interfered with, re-
strained, and coerced employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act,
and is discriminating in regard to the hire or tenure
or terms or conditions of employment of its em-
ployees, thereby discouraging membership in a
labor organization, and, by such acts, Respondent
has violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
1 (
JANE-I LYNN. INC.
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,
Janet Lynn, Inc., Bronx, New York, its officers,
agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Interrogating its employees concerning their
union activities and threatening them with dis-
charge if they support, join, or assist the Union.
(b) Discharging and refusing to reinstate employ-
ees because they engage in union activities.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering
with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of
the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which
the Board finds will efffectuate the policies of the
Act:
(a) Offer Carmen Cruz immediate and full rein-
statement to her former position, or, if that position
no longer exists, to a substantially equivalent posi-
tion, without prejudice to her seniority and other
rights and privileges previously enjoyed and make
her whole for any loss of earnings she may have
suffered by paying her a sum of money to be deter-
mined in accordance with the formula set forth in
the section of this Decision entitled "The
Remedy."
(b) Preserve and, upon request, make available to
the Board or its agents, for examination and copy-
ing, all payroll records, social security payment
records, timecards, personnel records and reports,
and all other records necessary to analyze and
compute the amount of backpay due under the
terms of this Order.
(c) Post at its Bronx, New York. facility copies
of the attached notice marked "Appendix."'
I In the event that this Order is enforced hs a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted hb
Order of the National l ahor Relations Hoard" shall read "Posted Pursu-
ant to a Judgment of the United States Court iof Appeals Enforcing anll
Order of the National Labor Relations Board"
Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the
Regional Director for Region 2, 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.
(d) 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.
APPENDIX
No-ricEi To EMPI.OYEES
POST-EI BY ORDI-R OF THI
NATIONAIl LABOR REI.ArTIONs BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WI Will. NOT interrogate our employees
concerning their union activities.
W'I: Wil. NOT threaten our employees with
discharge if they support, join, or assist a
union.
Wl Wil I. NOT discharge and refuse to rein-
state our employees because they engage in
union activities.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner
interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed them in
Section 7 of the Act.
WE witt.L offer Carmen Cruz immediate and
full reinstatement to her former position, or, if
that position no longer exists, to a substantially
equivalent position, without prejudice to her
seniority and other rights or privileges previ-
ously enjoyed, and w wii.. make her whole
for any loss of earnings she may have suffered
by reason of the discrimination against her,
plus interest.
JAN! I LYNN, INC.