Master Engineering Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 6, 1974

215 N.L.R.B. 376 (N.L.R.B. 1974)

376 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Master Engineering Corp . and United Electrical, Ra-
dio and Machine Workers of America , UE and The
Shop Committee , Party to the Contract. Case
18-CA--4123
December 6, 1974
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND
KENNEDY
Upon the filing of a charge and amended charge by
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of
America, UE, hereafter the Union, the Regional Direc-
tor for Region 18 of the National Labor Relations
Board issued a complaint alleging that Master Engi-
neering Corp., hereafter Respondent, had engaged in
and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge and
amended charge and complaint and notice of hearing
were duly served on the parties.
The complaint alleged violations of Section 8(a)(2)
and (1) of the Act by Respondent's domination and
interference with the formation and administration of
a labor organization, the Shop Committee, by initiating
and sponsoring its formation, giving it financial assist-
ance, directing and permitting it to meet and organize
on company premises and on company time, and allow-
ing it the use of company materials. It is further alleged
that Respondent then recognized the Shop Committee
and negotiated, entered into, and implemented a collec-
tive-bargaining agreement with it at a time when it did
not represent a majority of the employees.' Violations
of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act are alleged to have
occurred when Respondent's agents threatened em-
ployees with discharge if they attended a meeting to
protest the Respondent's disregard of its agreement
with the Shop Committee, and by the subsequent dis-
charge and refusal to reinstate three employees for their
taking part in the meeting and because they were active
on behalf of the Union.
By letter dated May 8, 1974, Respondent answered
the complaint, in substance, admitting the jurisdic-
tional allegations and denying the commission of unfair
labor practices. Thereafter, the record indicates that by
letter dated May 22, 1974, Respondent informed coun-
sel for the General Counsel that it had liquidated its
business, requested that its answer be withdrawn, and
stated that it would accept the entry of a summary
judgment by the Board. The Shop Committee also sub-
I The complaint inadvertently alleges the date of recognition to be Octo-
ber 15 , 1974, which is hereby corrected to reflect the date indicated by the
record, October 15, 1973.
mitted a letter to the effect that it had no objections to
the entry of a summary judgment.
Thereafter, counsel for the General Counsel filed the
instant Motion for Summary Judgment based on Re-
spondent's withdrawal of its answer, which leaves no
issues of fact or law to be resolved by a hearing. The
Board issued an order transferring the proceedings to
the Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the sum-
mary judgment should not be granted. Respondent
filed no opposition to the granting of the summary
judgment.
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
There is no outstanding answer to the complaint in
this matter by virtue of Respondent's withdrawal of its
initial answer, and pursuant to Section 102.20 of our
Rules and Regulations, we find the allegations of the
complaint to be admitted and true.' Accordingly, the
General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment is
granted.
On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes
the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
Respondent, a Minnesota corporation with its only
office and place of business in Minneapolis, Minnesota,
is engaged at all times material herein in the manufac-
ture and production of aluminum castings and related
products on a nonretail basis. In the year ending
December 31, 1973, which period is representative of
its operations at all times material hereto, Respondent,
in the course and conduct of its business operations,
purchased and caused to be transported and delivered
at its Minneapolis, Minnesota, facility, aluminum cast-
ings and other goods valued in excess of $50,000 of
which goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000
were transported and delivered to that facility directly
from points located outside the State of Minnesota.
During the same period, Respondent, in the course and
conduct of its business operations, manufactured, sold,
2 Sec 102 20 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
which provides in pertinent part
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 knowl-
edge, 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
215 NLRB No. 71
MASTER ENGINEERING CORP. 377
and distributed at its Minneapolis , Minnesota , facility,
products valued in excess of $50,000 of which products
valued in excess of $50 ,000 were shipped from said
facility directly to points outside the State 'of Min-
nesota.
We find on the basis of the foregoing that Respond-
ent 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.
ment with the Shop Committee at a time when it did
not represent a majority of the employees ; and has
unlawfully discriminated in regard to the terms and
conditions of employment of its employees Bruce Lar-
son, Verlyce Berg , and Patricia Erickson , and by all
such conduct , Respondent has engaged in and is engag-
ing in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8 (a)(1), (2), and (3) of the Act.
IV THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON
COMMERCE
11 THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Electrical , Radio and Machine Workers of
America, UE, and the Shop Committee are labor or-
ganizations within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the
Act.
III THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
1. Since on or about October 15, 1973, and continu-
ing to date , Respondent has dominated and interfered
with the formation and administration of a labor organ-
ization and contributed financial and other support to
it by initiating , forming, sponsoring , promoting, and
encouraging the formation of the Shop Committee, by
participating in the affairs of the Shop Committee, by
directing and permitting the Shop Committee to organ-
ize and conduct meetings during working hours on
company premises and utilizing company materials,
and by recognizing , bargaining with , entering into, and
implementing a collective -bargaining agreement with
the, Shop Committee concerning employees ' wages and
working conditions at a time when the Shop Commit-
tee did not represent a majority of the employees.
2. On or about February 15, 1974, Respondent's
agents threatened employees with discharge if an em-
ployee meeting to protest Respondent 's disregard for
its agreement with the Shop Committee was held.
3. On or about February 15, 1974, Respondent dis-
charged employees Bruce Larson , Verlyce Berg, and
Patricia Erickson because of said employees' activities
for and on behalf of the Union and in opposition to the
Shop Committee and because said employees were in-
volved in or associated with other employees who were
involved in the scheduling of an employee meeting to
protest Respondent's disregard of its agreement with
the Shop Committee.
On the basis of the foregoing , we find that Respond-
ent interfered with , restrained , and coerced its em-
ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them
under Section 7 of the Act; has dominated and inter-
fered with the formation and administration of a labor
organization and contributed financial and other sup-
port to it and recognized , bargained with, and entered
into and implemented a collective -bargaining agree-
The activities of Respondent set forth in section III,
above , occurring in connection with its operations de-
scribed in section I, above, have a close , intimate, and
substantial relationship to trade , traffic , and commerce
among the several States and tend to lead to labor
disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the
free flow thereof.
V THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent committed certain
unfair labor practices , our normal remedy involves,
inter alia, a cease-and-desist order and a requirement
that employees discriminated against be made whole
for any loss of earnings and be offered reinstatement
and that a notice be posted on the Employer 's premises.
It is undisputed , however , that Respondent has liqui-
dated or is in the process of liquidating its business and
that the usual backpay and reinstatement orders must
be modified accordingly . Therefore , Respondent's
backpay liability will run from the date the dis-
criminatees were discharged to the date that Respond-
ent would have normally terminated such employees
due to the liquidation of the business , less any net
interim earnings , and such amount shall be computed
on the basis set forth in F W. Woolworth Company, 90
NLRB 289 (1950), and Isis Plumbing & Heating
Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962). As to reinstatement, Re-
spondent will be required to offer reinstatement to the
discriminatees to their former positions or to substan-
tially equivalent positions in the event it resumes busi-
ness operations. In these circumstances , the posting of
the usual notice will not be required but copies of the
notice shall be mailed by Respondent to employees and
to the Union at their last known address.
On the basis of the foregoing , the Board makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Master Engineering Corp., is an employer engaged
in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7)
of the Act.
378 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of
Americ.., UE, and the Shop Committee are labor or-
ganizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the
Act.
3. By the acts described in section III, above, Re-
spondent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced
and discriminated against employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act, and
has dominated, and interfered with the formation and
administration of a labor organization, and thereby has
engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1), (2), and (3) of
the Act.
4. 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 Re-
lations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that Respondent, Master Engi-
neering Corp., Minneapolis, Minnesota, its officers,
agents , successors, and assigns , shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Threatening employees with discharge if they en-
gage in any concerted activity for the purpose of collec-
tive bargaining or for their mutual aid or protection.
(b) Discouraging membership in or activities on be-
half of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine
Workers of America, UE, or any other labor organiza-
tion, by discharging or terminating employees, or oth-
erwise discriminating with regard to the hire or tenure
of its employees because they join or assist the above-
named organization, or any other labor organization,
or engage in concerted activity for the purpose of col-
lective bargaining or for their mutual aid and protec-
tion.
(c) Dominating or interfering with the formation and
administration of the Shop Committee, or any other
labor organization, or contributing financial or other
support to it, and recognizing, bargaining, agreeing to,
and implementing an agreement with a labor organiza-
tion at a time when it does not represent a majority of
the employees in an appropriate unit.
(d) In any other manner interfering with, restraining,
or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights
under Section 7 of the Act, as amended.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the
Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) If Respondent should resume business opera-
tions, in whole or in part, offer to reinstate employees
Bruce Larson, Verlyce Berg, and Patricia Erickson to
their former positions or, if those positions are no
longer available, to substantially equivalent positions.
(b) Make whole employees Bruce Larson, Verlyce
Berg, and Patricia Erickson for losses suffered by rea-
son of the discrimination against them in the manner
set forth: in the section of this Decision entitled "The
Remedy."
(c) Preserve and, upon request, make available to the
Board or its agents , for examination and copying, all
payroll records, social security payment records, time-
cards, personnel records and reports, and all other re-
cords necessary to analyze the amount of backpay due
under the terms of this Order.
(d) Mail copies of the attached notice marked "Ap-
pendix," on forms to be provided by the Regional Di-
rector for Region 18, to the Union, and to all employees
at their last known address, after being signed by Re-
spondent's representative.
(e) Notify the Regional Director for Region 18, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps the Respondent has taken to comply here-
with.
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT threaten employees with discharge
if they engage in any concerted activity for the
purpose of collective bargaining or for their
mutual aid or protection.
WE WILL NOT discourage membership in, or. ac-
tivities on behalf of, the United Electrical, Radio
and Machine Workers of America, UE, or any
other labor organization, by discharging or ter-
minating employees, or otherwise discriminating
with regard to the hire or tenure of its employees
because they join or assist the above-named organ-
ization, or any other labor organization, or engage
in concerted activity for the purpose of collective
bargaining or for their mutual aid and protection.
WE WILL NOT dominate or interfere with the for-
mation and administration of the Shop Commit-
tee, or any other labor organization, or contribute
financial or other support to it, and recognize,
bargain, agree to, and implement an agreement
with a labor organization at a time when it does
not represent a majority of the employees in an
appropriate unit.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with,
restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of
their rights under Section 7 of the Act, as
amended.
WE WILL offer to reinstate employees Bruce Lar-
son, Verlyce Berg, and Pat Erickson to their for-
MASTER ENGINEERING CORP. 379
mer positions or, if those positions are no longer by reason of the discrimination against them in the
available , to substantially equivalent positions if manner set forth in the section the Board's Deci-
business resumes. sion entitled "The Remedy."
WE WILL make whole employees Bruce Larson,
Verlyce Berg , and Pat Erickson for losses suffered MASTER ENGINEERING CORP