Nathan Katz Realty

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 23, 2000

331 N.L.R.B. 22 (N.L.R.B. 2000)

331 NLRB No. 22
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
Board volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex-
ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C.
20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can
be included in the bound volumes.
Nathan Katz Realty LLC, et al.1 and Local 32B–32J,
Service Employees International Union, AFL–
CIO. Case 29–CA–23280
May 23, 2000
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN TRUESDALE AND MEMBERS LIEBMAN AND
HURTGEN
Pursuant to a charge filed on January 27, 2000,2 the
General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board
issued a complaint on February 25, 2000, alleging that
the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of
the National Labor Relations Act by refusing the Union’s
request to bargain following the Union’s certification in
Case 29–RC–9265. (Official notice is taken of the “re-
cord” in the representation proceeding as defined in the
Board’s Rules and Regulations, Secs. 102.68 and
102.69(g); Frontier Hotel, 265 NLRB 343 (1982).) The
Respondent filed an answer admitting in part and deny-
ing in part the allegations in the complaint.
On April 4, 2000, the General Counsel filed a Motion
for Summary Judgment. On April 6, 2000, the Board
issued an order transferring the proceeding to the Board
and a Notice to Show Cause why the motion should not
be granted. The Respondent filed a response.

1 The complaint names as the Respondent the following entities:
Nathan Katz Realty LLC: 37–06 81st Street LLC; 37–30 81st Street
LLC; 37–40 81st Street LLC; Lisa Realty LLC (owner of 37–25 81st
Street building); 33–51 73rd Street LLC; 41–26 73rd Street LLC; 32–
06 47th Street LLC; 34–10 84th Street LLC; 34–15 Parsons Boulevard
LLC; 47–06 46th Street LLC; 47–05 45th Street; 43–09 47th Avenue
LLC; Sunnywood Management Corp. (owner of 47–05 44th Street; 47–
06 45th Street LLC; 44–08 47th Avenue and 44–14 47th Avenue); 99–
60/65 64th Street LLC (owner of 99-60 64th Avenue and 99–65 64th
Road); Rebecca Realty LLC (owner of 88–36 Elmhurst Avenue); Mi-
chelle Realty LLC (owner of 41–25 Case Street); Miriam Realty LLC
(owner of 43–23 40th Street); RKL Realty LLC (owner of 43–08 40th
Street); 37–37 88th Street LLC; 188–30/34 87th Drive LLC; Katz and
Levy LLC (owner of 39–11 62nd Street, 39–15 62nd Street, and 39–19
62nd Street); NRM Realty LLC (owner of 35–65 86th Street); 35–16
34th Street LLC; 83–40 Britton Avenue LLC; 119–21 Metropolitan
Avenue LLC; 34–09 83rd Street LLC; 98–30 67th Avenue LLC; 32–42
33rd Street LLC; and 32–52 33rd Street LLC. In the underlying repre-
sentation proceeding, it was determined that these companies constitute
a single employer and that an overall, multisite unit was appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining.
2 Although the Respondent’s answer to the complaint denies having
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to whether the
charge was filed by the Union on January 27, 2000, and served on the
Respondent by regular mail on February 2, 2000, a copy of the charge
and certificate of service are attached to the General Counsel’s motion
and the Respondent has not challenged the authenticity of those docu-
ments in response to the Notice to Show Cause. Accordingly, we find
that the filing and the service of the charge has been established. Elec-
trical Workers IBEW Local 11 (Anco Electrical), 273 NLRB 183, 191
(1984).
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
In its answer, the Respondent admits in part and denies
in part the complaint allegations that the Union requested
bargaining and that the Respondent refused to bargain,3
but attacks the validity of the certification on the basis of
its objections to the election and the Board’s unit deter-
mination in the representation proceeding.
All representation issues raised by the Respondent
were or could have been litigated in the prior representa-
tion proceeding.4 The Respondent does not offer to ad-
duce at a hearing any newly discovered and previously
unavailable evidence, nor does it allege any special cir-
cumstances that would require the Board to reexamine
the decision made in the representation proceeding. We
find that the Respondent has not raised any representa-
tion issue that is properly litigable in this unfair labor
practice proceeding. See Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v.
NLRB, 313 U.S. 146, 162 (1941). Accordingly, we grant
the Motion for Summary Judgment.5
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent has been a New
York limited liability company, with its principal office
and place of business located at 41–33 75th Street, Elm-
hurst, New York, (the Elmhurst facility), and with vari-
ous other locations, where it has been engaged in manag-
ing various residential apartment buildings.6
During the 12-month period preceding issuance of the
complaint, the Respondent, in the course and conduct of
its business operations, derived gross annual revenues
valued in excess of $500,000 and purchased and received
at its Elmhurst, New York facility, and at the facilities
listed in footnote 1, goods and materials valued in excess

3 The Respondent admits that on January 21, 2000, the Union, in
writing, requested to meet and bargain, and that on February 9, 2000, it
refused to bargain. The Respondent denies that on November 4, 1999,
the Union requested bargaining and that on December 22, 1999, the
Respondent refused to bargain.
4 In its response to the Notice to Show Cause, the Respondent does
not raise any matters warranting a hearing but instead relies on the
record in the underlying representation case. We find that the Respon-
dent’s denials do not raise any issues warranting a hearing.
5 Member Hurtgen dissented from the denial of review of both the
Decision and Direction of Election and the Supplemental Decision. He
agrees, however, that nothing new is presented in this proceeding and
accordingly, for institutional reasons, agrees that summary judgment is
appropriate.
6 In its answer, the Respondent, with respect to the jurisdictional
facts alleged in par. 2 of the complaint, admits only “that Nathan Katz
Realty, LLC, is a New York limited liability company with its principal
office and place of business located at 41–33 75th Street, Elmhurst,
New York, and that it is the managing agent of the various residential
apartment buildings listed” in fn. 1, supra. To the extent this response
denies other allegations of that paragraph, it does not raise an issue
warranting a hearing.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 2
of $5000 directly from enterprises located outside the
State of New York.
We find that the Respondent is an employer engaged
in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and
(7) of the Act and that the Union is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Certification
Following the election held on July 27, 1999, the Un-
ion was certified on October 27, 1999, as the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of the employees in
the following appropriate unit:

All full-time and regular part-time building service em-
ployees, including superintendents and porters em-
ployed by the Employer and the other companies listed
in footnote 1 of this decision, at the various apartment
buildings listed in footnote 1 of this decision, but ex-
cluding all business office clerical employees, mainte-
nance craft employees, guards, and supervisors as de-
fined in the Act.

The Union continues to be the exclusive representative un-
der Section 9(a) of the Act.
B. Refusal to Bargain
On January 21, 2000, the Union, in writing, requested
the Respondent to bargain and, on February 9, 2000, the
Respondent, by its counsel, in writing, refused to bar-
gain. We find that this refusal constitutes an unlawful
refusal to bargain in violation of Section 8(a)(5) and (1)
of the Act.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
By refusing on and after February 9, 2000, to bargain
with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining
representative of employees in the appropriate unit, the
Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices affect-
ing commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and
(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has violated Section
8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall order it to cease and
desist, to bargain on request with the Union, and, if an
understanding is reached, to embody the understanding
in a signed agreement.
To ensure that the employees are accorded the services
of their selected bargaining agent for the period provided
by the law, we shall construe the initial period of the cer-
tification as beginning the date the Respondent begins to
bargain in good faith with the Union. Mar-Jac Poultry
Co., 136 NLRB 785 (1962); Lamar Hotel, 140 NLRB
226, 229 (1962), enfd. 328 F.2d 600 (5th Cir. 1964), cert.
denied 379 U.S. 817 (1964); Burnett Construction Co.,
149 NLRB 1419, 1421 (1964), enfd. 350 F.2d 57 (10th
Cir. 1965).
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Nathan Katz Realty, LLC, et al. and the
other companies listed in footnote 1 of this decision,
Elmhurst, New York, its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Refusing to bargain with Local 32B–32J, Service
Employees International Union, AFL–CIO, as the exclu-
sive bargaining representative of the employees in the
bargaining unit.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) On request, bargain with the Union as the exclusive
representative of the employees in the following appro-
priate unit on terms and conditions of employment, and if
an understanding is reached, embody the understanding
in a signed agreement:

All full-time and regular part-time building service em-
ployees, including superintendents and porters em-
ployed by the Employer and the other companies listed
in footnote 1 of this decision, at the various apartment
buildings listed in footnote 1 of this decision, but ex-
cluding all business office clerical employees, mainte-
nance craft employees, guards, and supervisors as de-
fined in the Act.

(b) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Elmhurst, New York, copies of the attached
notice marked “Appendix.”7 Copies of the notice, on
forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 29,
after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized repre-
sentative, shall be posted by the Respondent and main-
tained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places
including all places where notices to employees are cus-
tomarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the
Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material. In the event
that, during the pendency of these proceedings, the Re-
spondent has gone out of business or closed the facility
involved in these proceedings, the Respondent shall du-
plicate and mail, at its own expense, a copy of the notice
to all current employees and former employees employed
by the Respondent at any time since February 9, 2000.
(c) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file
with the Regional Director a sworn certification of a re-
sponsible official on a form provided by the Region at-

7 If 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 Na-
tional Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board.”
NATHAN KATZ REALTY, LLC 3
testing to the steps that the Respondent has taken to
comply.
Dated, Washington, D.C. May 23, 2000

John C. Truesdale, Chairman

Wilma B. Liebman, Member

Peter J. Hurtgen, Member

(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government

The National Labor Relations Board has found that we vio-
lated the National Labor Relations Act and has ordered us to
post and abide by this notice.

WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain with Local 32B–32J,
Service Employees International Union, AFL–CIO, as
the exclusive representative of the employees in the bar-
gaining unit.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, on request, bargain with the Union and put
in writing and sign any agreement reached on terms and
conditions of employment for our employees in the bar-
gaining unit:

All full-time and regular part-time building service em-
ployees, including superintendents and porters em-
ployed by us and the other companies listed in footnote
1 of the Board’s Decision and Order, at the various
apartment buildings listed in footnote 1 of the Board’s
Decision and Order, but excluding all business office
clerical employees, maintenance craft employees,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.

NATHAN KATZ REALTY, LLC, ET AL.