Mazda South

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 6, 1979

243 N.L.R.B. 1092 (N.L.R.B. 1979)

Mazda tlme
Mo-
Administrat~ve
Inc.)
Retail
Associutes, Inc.'
International
sportre,
8(a)(5)
Re~pondent.~
13.
Inc., IO(c)
8(aX5) (1) elations
1
Machin-
adopted followtng findlngs Admlnlstratlve and Workers' AFL-C1o' herein Judge: Maz-
Union. LOUIS AS- & south: (2) WMS member of Assoclatlon nego-
sociation, Inca, herein called the Association. In so tlatlonn d ~ d notlfy
Un~on 11s defls~on unilaterally wlthdraw As~oclal~on.
3 120 NLRB 388 (1958).
~ l t h o u f i contention Im-
withdrew from the mul tiemployer association after ~~ ex~slcd tlme wlthdrawal. tf impasse d ~ d exist this
constitute circumstance excuslng un~lateral wlthdrawal
mult~employer amratlon. Charles Bonunno Lnen Servrce. Inc.
(1979).
1
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Seven Motors Ltd., d/b/a South; and South
County Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., d/b/a Seven
tors; South County Motors Sales, Inc. (Formerly
South County Chrysler-Plymouth, d/b/a
Seven Motors; and South County Motor Sales,
Inc., d/b/a Don Flier Motors, Jointly and District
No. 9, Association of Machinists And
Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO. Case 14-CA-
August 6, 1979
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
On December 1977, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board issued its Decision and Order in the
above-en titled proceeding,' finding that South
County Motor Sales, herein called Respondent.
violated Section and of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, by refusing to execute a
collective-bargaining agreement reached between
District No. 9, International Association of
the and the Greater St. Automotive
finding, the Board adopted the Administrative Law
Judge's Decision in which he found that Respondent
'233 NLRB 1198.
243 NLRB No. 139
the onset of negotiationsZ at a when no impasse
in bargaining was in effect. The Board also adopted
the Law Judge's finding that Respon-
dent's unilateral withdrawal was not excused by any
unusual circumstance within the meaning of
The Board ordered that Respondent
cease and desist from refusing to execute said collec-
tive-bargaining agreement and take certain affirma-
tive action to remedy the unfair labor practices.
The Board, sua has decided to reconsider its
original Decision and Order. We have concluded that
this case was correctly decided and we hereby affirm
our conclusion that the Respondent violated Section
and (I) of the Act by refusing to execute the
contract reached between the Union and the Associ-
ation which represented
ORDER
Pursuant to Section of the National Labor
Act. as amended, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board hereby affirms its original Decision and
Order in this proceeding (233 NLRB 198 (1977)).
The Board also the of the Law
( I ) Respondent was the successor to Seven Motors Ltd., d/b/a
Respondent a the when the
for a new contract began: and (3) Respondent not the
of to from the
the record does not support Respondent's that
at the of even would
not an unusual from
the See D
243 NLRB 1093