Value Line Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1986

281 N.L.R.B. 212 (N.L.R.B. 1986)

212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Harold F. Kidd d/b/a Value Line Company and
United Furniture Workers of America, Local
282, AFL-CIO . Case 26-CA-11451
29 August 1986
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS JOHANSEN, BABSON, AND
STEPHENS
Upon a charge filed by the Union 3 January
1986, the General Counsel of the National Labor
Relations Board issued a complaint 29 January
1986 against the Company, the Respondent, alleg-
ing that it has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of
the National Labor Relations Act.I Although prop-
erly served copies of the charge and complaint, the
Company has failed to file an answer.
On 7 March 1986 the General Counsel filed a
Motion for Summary Judgment. On 11 March 1986
the Board issued an order transferring the proceed-
ing to the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why
the motion should not be granted. Thereafter, the
Company filed a letter (described infra) with the
Board and with the General Counsel, and the Gen-
eral Counsel filed a response to the letter, urging
that it be rejected. No other response was submit-
ted.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegat-
ed its authority in this proceeding to a three-
member panel.
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions provides that the allegations in the complaint
shall be deemed admitted if an answer is not filed
within 10 days from service of the complaint,
unless good cause is shown. The complaint and
amended complaint state that unless an answer is
filed within 10 days of service, "all the allegations
in the complaint shall be deemed to be admitted to
be true and shall be so found by the Board." Fur-
ther, by telegram dated 28 February 1986, the Gen-
eral Counsel notified the Company that the dead-
line for filing answers to the complaint and amend-
ed complaint had expired and that unless an answer
was received by 4 March 1986 a Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment would be filed.
On 14 March 1986 the Board, as noted previous-
ly, received a handwritten letter from the Respond-
ent addressed to John C. Truesdale, Executive Sec-
retary. A copy of the same letter was received by
the General Counsel on 12 March 1986. The letter
was signed by the owner of the Respondent,
' An amended charge was filed 4 February 1986 and an amended com-
plaint was issued 14 February 1986
Harold F. Kidd, and was dated 10 March 1986.
The letter reads as follows:
Enclosed please find the information furnished
to the union on February 28, 1986.
Attached to the letter was a copy of a handrwitten
letter dated 28 February 1986 which was addressed
to the Union and listed employees Larry Walls,
Ruby Wilkes, Earnest Watkins, and Wavy Jamison
and certain dates they were assertedly "paid for va-
cations." This letter was also signed by Harold F.
Kidd.
The General Counsel contends that the 10
March letter is an apparent response to the General
Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment or is an
untimely attempt to answer the amended com-
plaint. More specifically, the General Counsel con-
tends that the letter should be rejected because it is
not an answer within the meaning of Section
102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regulations be-
cause it does not specifically admit, deny, or ex-
plain each allegation of the amended complaint,
and in any event is untimely filed. In this last
regard the General Counsel contends that answers
to the complaint and amended complaint were due
11 and 27 February 1986, respectively, that the
deadline for filing an answer to the amended com-
plaint was extended to 4 March 1986, and that
since the General Counsel did not receive the sub-
ject letter until 12 March 1986, after filing for sum-
mary judgment, the letter cannot be considered a
timely answer. We find merit in the General Coun-
sel's contentions.
Accordingly, we find that the Respondent's
letter is inadequate as an answer and is untimely
filed.
In the absence of good cause being shown for
the failure to file a timely answer, we grant the
General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the fol-
lowing
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. JURISDICTION
The Company, a sole proprietorship, manufac-
tures furniture at its facilities in Arkadelphia, Ar-
kansas, and Collierville, Tennessee, where it annu-
ally sold and shipped from its two facilities prod-
ucts, goods, and materials valued in excess of
$50,000 directly to points outside the States of Ten-
nessee and Arkansas. The Respondent also annually
purchased and received at the Collierville and Ar-
kadelphia facilities products, goods, and materials
valued in excess of $50,000 directly from points
outside the States of Tennessee and Arkansas. We
281 NLRB No. 31
VALUE LINE CO.
find that the Company is an employer engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and
(7) of the Act and that the Union is a labor organi-
zation within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the
Act.
II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
The Union is the collective-bargaining represent-
ative of the employees in the following appropriate
unit:
All production and maintenance employees
employed by the Respondent at its Collierville
and Memphis, Tennessee, facilities. Excluded:
All office clerical employees, guards, assistant
supervisors, assistant foremen and supervisors,
as defined in the Act.
The Union was certified on 20 May 1983. The
Respondent and the Union entered into an agree-
ment about 19 August 1985 which provided for the
payment of vacation pay to employees affected by
the closing of the Collierville, Tennessee facility.
Since late October 1985, the Union has requested
the Respondent to furnish documentation which
would support the Respondent's assertion that it
paid vacation benefits to employees Wavy Jamison
and Ruby Wilkes. The information requested by
the Union is necessary for, and relevant to, the
Union's performance of its function as the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of the unit.
Since late October 1985, the Respondent has failed
and refused to furnish the Union the requested in-
formation. Also since late October 1985, the Re-
spondent has failed and refused to abide by the
terms of the closing agreement by failing and refus-
ing to pay vacation benefits to former employees
Wavy Jamison, Ruby Wilkes, Earnest Watkins, and
Larry Walls.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. By failing and refusing since late October 1985
to furnish the Union with the documentation it re-
quested which would support the Respondent's as-
sertion that it paid vacation benefits to employees
Wavy Jamison and Ruby Wilkes , such information
being necessary for, and relevant to, the Union's
performance of its function as the exclusive collec-
tive-bargaining representative of the employees in
the unit , the Respondent has engaged in unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6)
and (7) of the Act.
2. By failing and refusing since late October 1985
to abide by the terms of the closing agreement
which provided for the payment of vacation pay to
employees affected by the closing of the Collier-
213
ville facility , and by failing and refusing to pay va-
cation benefits to former employees Wavy Jamison,
Ruby Wilkes, Earnest Watkins, and Larry Walls,
the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor prac-
tices 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 engaged
in certain 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.
We shall order the Respondent to provide the
Union with the information it has requested since
about late October 1985, and to abide by the clos-
ing agreement entered into 19 August 1985, which
provided for payment of vacation pay to employ-
ees affected by the closing of the Collierville, Ten-
nessee facility, by paying vacation benefits plus in-
terest as computed in Florida Steel Corp., 231
NLRB 651 (1977), to former employees Wavy Ja-
mison, Ruby Wilkes, Earnest Watkins, and Larry
Walls.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that
the Respondent, Harold F. Kidd d/b/a Value Line
Company, Collierville, Tennessee, and Arkadel-
phia, Arkansas, its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Failing and refusing to provide the Union, on
request, with information necessary for, and rele-
vant to, the Union's performance of its function as
the exclusive collective-bargaining representative
of the bargaining unit employees.
(b) Failing and refusing to abide by the terms of
the closing agreement entered into about 19 August
1985 which provided for the payment of vacation
pay to employees affected by the closing of the
Collierville facility.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering
with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7
of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action neces-
sary to effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Provide the Union with the information it has
requested since about late October 1985 which is
relevant to its function as the exclusive representa-
tive of the bargaining unit employees.
(b) Abide by the terms of the closing agreement
entered into 19 August 1985 and pay vacation pay
plus interest as provided in the "Remedy" to em-
214 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ployees affected by the closing of the Collierville
facility.
(c) Preserve and, on request , make available to
the Board or its agents for examination and copy-
ing, all payroll records, social security payment
records, timecards, personnel records and reports,
and all other records necessary to analyze the
amount of backpay due under the terms of this
Order.
(d) Post at its facility in Collierville, Tennessee,
and Arkadelphia, Arkansas, copies of the attached
notice marked "Appendix."2 Copies of the notice,
on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 26, after being signed by the Respondent's
authorized representative, shall be posted by the
Respondent immediately upon receipt and main-
tained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous
places including all places where notices to em-
ployees are customarily posted . Reasonable steps
shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure that the
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any
other material.
(e) Notify the Regional Director in writing
within 20 days from the date of this Order what
steps the Respondent has taken to comply.
8 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 Nation-
al Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a Judgment 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 the National Labor Relations Act
and has ordered us to post and abide by this notice.
WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to provide the
Union, on request, with information necessary for,
and relevant to, the Union's performance of its
function as the exclusive collective-bargaining rep-
resentative of the bargaining unit employees.
WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to abide by the
terms of the closing agreement entered into about
19 August 1985 which provided for the payment of
vacation pay to employees affected by the closing
of the Collierville facility.
We will not in any like or related manner inter-
fere with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL provide the Union with the informa-
tion it has requested since about late October 1985
which is relevant to its function as the exclusive
representative of the bargaining unit employees.
WE WILL abide by the terms of the closing
agreement entered into 19 August 1985 and pay va-
cation pay plus interest to employees affected by
the closing of the Collierville facility.
HAROLD F. KIDD D/B/A VALUE
LINE COMPANY