TRINITY MARINE PRODUCTS, INC.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 23, 2015

15-CA-136100 (N.L.R.B. Feb. 23, 2015)

1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
TRINITY MARINE PRODUCTS, INC.
and Case 15-CA-136100
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
BOILERMAKERS, IRON SHIP BUILDERS,
BLACKSMITHS, FORGERS AND HELPERS, AFL-CIO
ORDER1
The Employer’s petition to revoke Subpoena B-1-JNSCF9 is denied. The
subpoena seeks information relevant to the matter under investigation and describes
with sufficient particularity the evidence sought, as required by Section 11(1) of the Act
and Section 102.31(b) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations.2 Further, the Employer

1 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a
three-member panel.
2 The Region indicated in its opposition brief that the Employer has provided documents
responsive to paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 17; that the Region is not
aware of any non-privileged responsive documents that the Employer has not provided;
and that, based on the Employer’s assurances that it is not aware of any additional
responsive documents and that it will provide any additional documents of which it later
becomes aware, the Region is not objecting to the Employer's response to those
paragraphs. In considering the petition to revoke, we have evaluated the subpoena in
light of the Region’s statements with respect to the above paragraphs.
To the extent that any of the subpoenaed documents have already been produced,
the Employer is not required to provide duplicates of those documents. To the extent
that the subpoena encompasses some documents that the Employer believes in good
faith to be subject to the attorney-client or attorney work product privileges, this Order is
without prejudice to the Employer’s prompt submission of a privilege log identifying and
describing each such document, providing sufficient detail to permit an assessment of
the Employer’s claim of privilege, and the Employer is directed to produce all responsive
documents not subject to any good faith claim of privilege. Further, with respect to
paragraph 6 of the subpoena, which seeks “manuals or handbooks applicable to the
Employer's employees, including discipline policies and rules of conduct, in effect from
January 1, 2014 to the present,” the Employer states that it does not maintain an
“employee manual” or “handbook” for its employees at its Caruthersville, Missouri
facility. Pet. p. 8. If the Employer does not maintain “manuals” or “handbooks,” it is not
2
has failed to establish any other legal basis for revoking the subpoena. See generally
NLRB v. North Bay Plumbing, Inc., 102 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 1996); NLRB v. Carolina
Food Processors, Inc., 81 F.3d 507 (4th Cir. 1996).
Dated, Washington, D.C., February 23, 2015.
PHILIP A. MISCIMARRA, MEMBER
KENT Y. HIROZAWA, MEMBER
HARRY I. JOHNSON, III, MEMBER

obligated to provide them; however, the Employer must provide a complete collection of
its policies applicable to its employees, in whatever format they appear, for the specified
time period.