Park Drop Forge

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 2, 2002

337 N.L.R.B. 115 (N.L.R.B. 2002)

Park Drop Forge, Division of Park-Ohio Industries,
Inc. and International Brotherhood of Boiler-
makers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forg­
ers and Helpers, AFL–CIO, Lodge No. 1086.
Case 8–CA–32497
July 2, 2002
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS LIEBMAN, COWEN, AND BARTLETT
The General Counsel seeks summary judgment in this
case on the ground that the Respondent has failed to file
an answer to the complaint. Upon a charge filed by the
Union on June 12, 2001, the General Counsel issued the
complaint on October 31, 2001, against Park Drop Forge,
Division of Park-Ohio Industries, Inc., the Respondent,
alleging that it has violated Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the
Act. The Respondent failed to file an answer.
On February 28, 2002, the Ge neral Counsel filed a
Motion for Summary Judgment with the Board. On
March 6, 2002, 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 no response. The allegations in the motion are
therefore undisputed.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
Sections 102.20 and 102.21 of the Board’s Rules and
Regulations provide that the allegations in the complaint
shall be deemed admitted if an answer is not filed within
14 days from service of the complaint, unless good cause
is shown. In addition, the complaint affirmatively states
that unless an answer is filed within 14 days of service,
all the allegations in the complaint will be considered
admitted. Further, the undisputed allegations in the Mo­
tion for Summary Judgment disclose that the Region, by
letter dated February 8, 2002, notified the Respondent
that unless an answer were received by February 14,
2002, a Motion for Summary Judgment would be filed.
In the absence of good cause being shown for the fail­
ure to file a timely answer, we grant the General Coun­
sel’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent, a Delaware cor­
poration with an office and place of business located at
777 East 79th Street, Cleveland, Ohio, has been engaged
in the manufacture and forging of crank shafts. Annu­
ally, in the conduct of its operations, the Respondent
sells and ships products valued in excess of $50,000 di­
rectly to points outside the State of Ohio.
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
At all material times the following individuals held the
positions set forth opposite their respective names and
have been supervisors of the Respondent within the
meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act and agents of the
Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the
Act:
D. P. Porter Plant Manager
Greg Muniak Vice President
The following emp loyees of the Respondent constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain­
ing within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees at Respon­
dent’s facility located at 777 East 79th Street, Cleve­
land, Ohio, but excluding all other employees, supervi­
sory personnel, and guards as defined in the Act.
At all material times, the Union has been the desig­
nated exclusive collective-bargaining representative of
the Respondent’s employees employed in the unit and
since then the Union has been recognized as the repre­
sentative by the Respondent. This recognition has been
embodied in successive collective-bargaining agree­
ments, the most recent of which is effective by its terms
from December 12, 2000, to December 11, 2006, and
was executed on about February 22, 2001.
At all times material, based on Section 9(a) of the Act,
the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining
representative of the unit.
On about January 1, 2001, the Respondent unilaterally
changed its existing drug policy and implemented a new
“zero tolerance” drug policy.
On about January 16, 2001, the Respondent unilater­
ally changed its existing attendance policy and imple­
mented a revised attendance policy.
The subjects set forth above relate to wages, hours, and
other terms and conditions of employment of the unit and
are mandatory subjects for the purposes of collective
bargaining. The Respondent unilaterally engaged in the
conduct above without prior notice to the Union and
without affording the Union an opportunity to bargain
with the Respondent with respect to this conduct and the
effects of this conduct.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
By unilaterally changing its drug and attendance poli­
cies, the Respondent has been failing and refusing to
bargain collectively with the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of its employees within the
meaning of Section 8(d) of the Act, and has thereby en-
gaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) and (5) and Sec­
tion 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
337 NLRB No. 115
2 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in cer­
tain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to cease and
desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act. Specifically, having
found that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(1)
and (5) by unilaterally changing its existing drug policy
and implementing a new “zero tolerance” drug policy,
and by unilaterally changing its attendance policy and
implementing a revised attendance policy, we shall order
the Respondent, on request, to restore the terms and
conditions of employment in effect before the
Respondent’s unlawful changes, and make the unit
employees whole for any loss of earnings and other
benefits attributable to its unlawful conduct, in
accordance with Ogle Protection Service, 183 NLRB 682
(1970), enfd. 444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971), with interest
as prescribed in New Horizons for the Retarded, 283
NLRB 1173 (1987). ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Park Drop Forge, Division of Park-Ohio
Industries, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, its officers, agents,
successors, and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Unilaterally changing its existing drug policy and
implementing a new “zero tolerance” drug policy.
(b) Unilaterally changing its existing attendance policy
and implementing a revised attendance policy.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exe rcise 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, restore the terms and conditions of em­
ployment in effect before the unilateral changes by re­
scinding the new “zero tolerance” drug policy and the
revised attendance policy.
(b) Make the employees in the following unit whole
for any loss of earnings and other benefits attributable to
the Respondent’s unlawful unilateral changes, in the
manner set forth in the remedy section of this decision:
All production and maintenance employees at Respon­
dent’s facility located at 777 East 79th Street, Cleve­
land, Ohio, but excluding all other employees, supervi­
sory personnel, and guards as defined in the Act.
(c) Preserve and, within 14 days of a request, or such
additional time as the Regional Director may allow for
good cause shown, provide at a reasonable place desig­
nated by the Board or its agents, all payroll records, so­
cial security payment records, timecards, personnel re-
cords and reports, and all other records including an elec­
tronic copy of such records if stored in electronic form,
necessary to analyze the amount of backpay due under
the terms of this Order.
(d) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Cleveland, Ohio, copies of the attached
notice marked “Appendix.”1 Copies of the notice, on
forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 8,
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 January 1, 2001.
(e) 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-
testing to the steps that the Respondent has taken to
comply.
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 Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and
obey this notice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join, or assist a union

Choose representatives to bargain with us on

your behalf

Act together with other employees for your

benefit and protection

Choose not to engage in any of these protected

activities.

WE WILL NOT unilaterally change our existing drug pol-
icy and implement a new “zero tolerance” drug policy.
WE WILL NOT unilaterally change our existing atten­
dance policy and implement a revised attendance policy.
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, restore the terms and conditions
of employment in effect before our unilateral changes by
1 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
National 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.”
PARK DROP FORGE 3
rescinding our new “zero tolerance” drug policy and our
revised attendance policy.
WE WILL make our employees in the following unit
whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits attrib­
utable to our unlawful unilateral changes, with interest:
All production and maintenance employees at our facil­
ity located at 777 East 79th Street, Cleveland, Ohio, but
excluding all other employees, supervisory personnel,
and guards as defined in the Act.
PARK DROP FORGE, DIVISION OF
PARK-OHIO INDUSTRIES, INC.