SK USA Clearners, Inc.,

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 20, 2006

346 N.L.R.B. 63 (N.L.R.B. 2006)

346 NLRB No. 63
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
bound 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.
SK USA Cleaners, Inc. and Local 947, International
Union of Journeymen and Allied Trades. Case
22–CA–26959
March 22, 2006
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS LIEBMAN, SCHAUMBER, AND KIRSANOW
The General Counsel seeks a default judgment in this
case on the ground that the Respondent has failed to file
an answer to the complaint. Upon a charge and amended
charges filed by the Union on June 20, August 18, and
September 28, 2005, respectively, the General Counsel
issued the complaint on September 30, 2005, against SK
USA Cleaners, Inc., the Respondent, alleging that it has
violated Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act. The Respon-
dent failed to file an answer.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
On November 9, 2005, the General Counsel filed with
the Board a Motion for Default Judgment. On November
15, 2005, the Board issued an order transferring the pro-
ceeding 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.
Ruling on Motion for Default Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations
provides that the allegations in a 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 stated
that unless an answer was filed by October 14, 2005, all
the allegations in the complaint could be found to be
true. Further, the undisputed allegations in the General
Counsel’s motion disclose that the Region, by letter
dated October 19, 2005, notified the Respondent that
unless an answer was received by October 26, 2005, a
motion for default 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 default judgment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent, a corporation,
with an office and place of business in Garfield, New
Jersey, has been engaged in the commercial laundry
business.
During the 12-month period preceding the issuance of
the complaint, the Respondent, in conducting its opera-
tions, purchased and received at its Garfield, New Jersey
facility goods valued in excess of $50,000 directly from
points outside the State of New Jersey.
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 Local 947, International Union of
Journeymen and Allied Trades, the Union, is a labor or-
ganization 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:
Cho Yi Jae Owner
Mrs. Cho (Owner’s Wife) Pay Roll Administration
About May 2005, the Respondent, by Cho Yi Jae, in
Garfield, New Jersey, interrogated and polled its em-
ployees about their union membership, activities, and
sympathies.
About April, May, and June 2005, the Respondent, by
Cho Yi Jae, in Garfield, New Jersey, threatened its em-
ployees with termination if they spoke with anyone from
the Union.
About June 2005, the Respondent, by Cho Yi Jae, in
Garfield, New Jersey, threatened its employees with a
reduction in pay if the Union won the election.
About June 15, 2005, the Respondent, by Cho Yi Jae,
in Garfield, New Jersey, made deductions from the pay-
checks of employees Margarita Hernandez, Urbano
Guzman, Vickie Huesca, and Emma Huesca because of
their support for the Union.
About June 15, 2005, the Respondent, by Mrs. Cho, in
Garfield, New Jersey, threatened its employees with un-
specified reprisals because of their support for the Union.
About June 15, 2005, the Respondent’s employees,
Margarita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman, Vickie Huesca,
and Emma Huesca, engaged in a concerted refusal to
work because the Respondent made the deductions from
their paychecks described above.
About June 15, 2005, the Respondent terminated Mar-
garita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman, Vickie Huesca, and
Emma Huesca.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD2
The Respondent discharged the employees named
above because they engaged in the concerted refusal to
work described above.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. By interrogating and polling employees regarding
their union membership, activities, and sympathies, and
by threatening employees because of their union support,
the Respondent has interfered with, restrained, and co-
erced employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
by Section 7 of the Act, in violation of Section 8(a)(1) of
the Act.
2. By making deductions from the payckecks of em-
ployees Margarita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman, Vickie
Huesca, and Emma Huesca, and by discharging them, the
Respondent has discriminated in regard to the hire or
tenure or terms and conditions of employment of its em-
ployees, thereby discouraging1 membership in a labor
organization, in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of
the Act.
The unfair labor practices of the Respondent affect
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of
the Act.
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 violated Section 8(a)(3) and
(1) of the Act by discharging Margarita Hernandez, Ur-
bano Guzman, Vickie Huesca, and Emma Huesca, we
shall order the Respondent to offer them full reinstate-
ment to their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer exist,
to substantially equivalent positions, without prejudice to
their seniority or any other rights and privileges previ-
ously enjoyed, and to make them whole for any loss of
earnings and other benefits suffered as a result of the
discrimination against them. Backpay shall be computed
in accordance with F. W. Woolworth Co., 90 NLRB 289
(1950), with interest as prescribed in New Horizons for
the Retarded, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987).
Further, having found that the Respondent violated
Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by making deductions from the
paychecks of Hernandez, Guzman, V. Huesca, and E.
Huesca, we shall order the Respondent to make them
whole for losses they suffered as a result of this conduct,
pursuant to 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, supra.

1 Par. 20 of the complaint states that the Respondent has been “en-
couraging” membership in a labor organization in violation of Sec.
8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act. We correct this inadvertent error.
The Respondent shall also be required to remove from
its files all references to the unlawful discharges of Her-
nandez, Guzman, V. Huesca, and E. Huesca, and to no-
tify them in writing that this has been done and that the
discharges will not be used against them in any way.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, SK USA Cleaners, Inc., Garfield, New Jer-
sey, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Interrogating and polling employees about their un-
ion membership, activities, and sympathies.
(b) Threatening employees with discharge if they
speak with representatives of Local 947, International
Union of Journeymen and Allied Trades, or any other
labor organization.
(c) Threatening employees with a reduction in pay and
other unspecified reprisals if they vote for union repre-
sentation.
(d) Failing and refusing to pay employees their full
wages because they support the Union, or any other labor
organization.
(e) Discharging employees because they engage in a
concerted refusal to work.
(f) 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) Within 14 days from the date of this Order, offer
Margarita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman, Vickie Huesca,
and Emma Huesca full reinstatement to their former jobs
or, if those jobs no longer exist, to substantially equiva-
lent positions, without prejudice to their seniority or any
other rights and privileges previously enjoyed.
(b) Make whole Margarita Hernandez, Urbano
Guzman, Vickie Huesca, and Emma Huesca for any loss
of earnings and other benefits resulting from the refusal
to pay them their full wages and their subsequent unlaw-
ful discharges, with interest, in the manner set forth in
the remedy section of this decision.
(c) Within 14 days from the date of this Order, remove
from its files all references to the unlawful discharges of
Margarita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman, Vickie Huesca,
and Emma Huesca and, within 3 days thereafter, notify
them in writing that this has been done and that the
unlawful discharges will not be used against them in any
way.
SK USA CLEANERS, INC. 3
(d) 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
electronic copy of such records if stored in electronic
form, necessary to analyze the amount of backpay due
under the terms of this Order.
(e) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Garfield, New Jersey, copies of the attached
notice marked “Appendix.”2 Copies of the notice, on
forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 22,
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 April 2005.
(f) 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.
Dated, Washington, D.C. March 22, 2006
Wilma B. Liebman, Member
Peter C. Schaumber, Member
Peter N. Kirsanow, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

2 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.”
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
violated 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 bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected
activities.
WE WILL NOT interrogate or poll you about your union
membership, activities, and sympathies.
WE WILL NOT threaten you with discharge if you speak
with representatives of Local 947, International Union of
Journeymen and Allied Trades, or any other labor or-
ganization.
WE WILL NOT threaten you with a reduction in pay or
other unspecified reprisals if you vote for union represen-
tation.
WE WILL NOT refuse to pay you your full wages be-
cause you support the Union, or any other labor organi-
zation.
WE WILL NOT discharge you because you engage in a
concerted refusal to work.
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, within 14 days from the date of the Board’s
Order, offer Margarita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman,
Vickie Huesca, and Emma Huesca full reinstatement to
their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer exist, to sub-
stantially equivalent positions, without prejudice to their
seniority or any other rights and privileges previously
enjoyed.
WE WILL make whole Margarita Hernandez, Urbano
Guzman, Vickie Huesca, and Emma Huesca for any loss
of earnings and other benefits resulting from our unlaw-
ful refusal to pay them their full wages and their unlaw-
ful discharges, with interest.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD4
WE WILL, within 14 days from the date of the Board’s
Order, remove from our files all references to the unlaw-
ful discharges of Margarita Hernandez, Urbano Guzman,
Vickie Huesca, and Emma Huesca, and WE WILL, within
3 days thereafter, notify them in writing that this has
been done, and that the unlawful discharges will not be
used against them in any way.
SK USA CLEANERS, INC.