The Summary of NLRB Decisions is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to substitute for the opinions of the NLRB. Inquiries should be directed to the Office of Public Affairs at Publicinfo@nlrb.gov or 202‑273‑1991.
Summarized Board Decisions
No Board Cases Issued
Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases
Renaissance Healthcare and Rehabilitation LLC (04-RC-104818) Philadelphia, PA, July 22, 2013. No exceptions having been filed to the Regional Director’s report overruling objections to a representation election, the Board certified District 1199C, National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees, AFSCME, AFL-CIO as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of Renaissance Healthcare and Rehabilitation employees. Petitioner – District 1199C, National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees, AFSCME, AFL-CIO.
North Shore Ambulance and Oxygen Service, Inc. (29-RC-096814) Corona, NY, July 25, 2013. No exceptions having been filed to the hearing officer’s report overruling objections to a representation election, the Board issued a Certification of Results of Election, certifying that International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 805, is not the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit employees.
Hawaii Tribune Herald (37-CA-007043) Hilo, HI, July 22, 2013. No exceptions having been filed the administrative law judge’s supplemental decision on the amounts of backpay due the discriminatees, the Board ordered Stephens Media, LLC, d/b/a Hawaii Tribune Herald to pay the amounts set forth in the judge’s recommended Order. Charges filed by Pacific Media Workers Guild, Local 39521, The Newspaper Guild – Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO.
C&G Distributing Co., Inc. (08-CA-091304) Lima, OH, July 26, 2013. With the filed exceptions having been withdrawn and no exceptions pending before the Board, the Board adopted the findings and conclusions of the administrative law judge, and ordered C&G Distributing Co., Inc. take the actions recommended by the administrative law judge. Charges filed by Truck Drivers, Warehousemen and Helpers, Local No. 908 a/w International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
Appellate Court Decisions
Teamsters "General" Local Union No. 200, Board Case No. 30-CB-005303 (reported at 357 NLRB No. 192) (7th Cir., decided July 23, 2013)
In a published opinion, the Court enforced the Board’s order in full, agreeing that the union unlawfully failed to maintain objective criteria for referrals, refused to refer a union dissident for employment, and refused to provide him with information concerning the referral.
Employee T.B. was a member of the dissident “Teamsters for a Democratic Union.” He was a former union official who lost his position to a slate of “Teamster 4 Teamsters” candidates, including coworker M.G., after a very contentious 2006 leadership election. Before losing his office, T.B. referred himself to a position with employer Bechtel Construction’s Elm Road Power Generating Station Project pursuant to a union agreement. Under that agreement, the union had the right to refer members to jobs within 48 hours of a request from Bechtel, and Bechtel had the discretion to hire or not hire the referral. In practice, however, Bechtel invariably hired the referred member.
In September 2007, T.B. was laid off from the Bechtel job for not possessing a proper license, along with some others. He filed a grievance over the layoff, and M.G. represented him as business agent. The two clashed throughout the grievance process, with T.B. claiming that the union was responsible for his layoff and M.G. responding that T.B.’s allegations were “hysterical.” From at least January through April 2008, T.B. repeatedly told M.G. that he wanted the union to refer him to a different job at Bechtel. In April 2008, a coworker and political ally of T.B. told him. that M.G. reported that T.B. “hasn’t put his name on the out-of-work list”—which was a surprise to T.B. because “the existence of such a list was news to [him].” At that point, T.B. requested M.G. put him on the list, which M.G. did (with a question mark next to T.B.’s name). Although the union maintained that it referred members on the “out-of-work” list according to specific objective criteria, the court described it as, in reality, “a loose conglomeration” of some names and qualifications in chronological order, some post-it notes, and some random comments like “seems like [a] good guy” and “friend of [a union member].” By August 2008, the union referred several members to T.B.’s old employer, but not T.B. T.B. visited the union office to request information about the workings of the referral system; no one there could provide T.B. the information he requested, and they never followed-up with him to provide it.
On these facts, the court agreed with the Board that the union violated its duty of fair representation—and therefore Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act—by failing to use objective criteria for referring members, discriminatorily not referring T.B. to a position with his former employer, and failing to provide T.B. with the information he requested. First, the court affirmed the Board’s finding that the agreement provided for an exclusive referral system, even though Bechtel retained the discretion to reject applicants, because, in practice, Bechtel hired all its employees through the hall. It then held that the union acted arbitrarily in its administration of the referral list, as there was evidence the union referred a member who never submitted his name to the list, bumped another to give him a “fair shake,” and littered the list with subjective opinions about its members’ qualifications. Next, applying Wright Line, 251 NLRB 1083, 1087 (1983), the court held that the Board reasonably found that the union discriminatorily refused to refer T.B. because of his affiliation with the Teamsters for a Democratic Union. In so finding, the court agreed that the Board properly found unlawful motive based on the fact that “union officials made derogatory statements against [T.B.] throughout the most recent union election” and T.B.’s clash with M.G. during the grievance proceedings. As for the union’s affirmative defense, the court rejected it, holding that the union could not plausibly argue that it would not have referred T.B. in the absence of unlawful motive, “given [its] inconsistent application of any job-referral criteria that it may have considered, as well as its inability to explain how it determined which job-seekers from the list to refer.” Finally, the court agreed that the Board reasonably held that “a union’s failure to produce a referral list, when requested by a union member, violates 8(b)(1)(A) of the NLRA.” Applying that rule here, the court affirmed the Board’s holding that the general information the union provided to T.B. and other job seekers did not satisfy his specific request. The court further rejected the union’s claim that its good faith belief that it was not operating an exclusive hiring hall absolved it of the duty to respond to T.B.’s information request, noting that the union cited no “caselaw or Board decisions” to support that argument. It enforced the Board’s order in full.
The Court’s opinion may be found here.
Administrative Law Judge Decisions
WCCO-TV (18-CA-100535; JD-47-13) Minneapolis, MN. Administrative Law Judge Arthur J. Amchan issued his decision on July 22, 2013. Charge filed by National Association of Broadcast Employees & Technicians-Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO (NABET-CWA).
Sho-Me Power Electric Cooperative (14-CA-097071; JD-46-13) Marshfield, MI. Administrative Law Judge Christine E. Dibble issued her decision on July 22, 2013. Charge filed by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 53, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO.
Sutter East Bay Hospitals d/b/a Sutter Delta Medical Center (20-CA-093609; JD(SF)-31-13) Northern, CA. Administrative Law Judge Jay R. Pollack issued his decision on July 23, 2013. Charge filed by California Nurses Association/National Nurses United.
Hospice Compassus (28-CA-094375; JD(NY)-34-13) Albuquerque, NM. Administrative Law Judge Joel P. Biblowitz issued his decision on July 23, 2013. Charge filed by an individual.
Northshore Sheet Metal, Inc. (19-CA-083657, et al.; JD(SF)-33-13) Everett, WA. Administrative Law Judge Eleanor Laws issued her decision on July 25, 2013. Charges filed by Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 66.
The Boeing Company (19-CA-089374; JD(SF)-34-13) Renton, WA. Administrative Law Judge Jeffrey D. Wedekind issued his decision on July 26, 2013. Charge filed by an individual.
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 560 (County Concrete Corporation) (22-CC-083895, et al.; JD-48-13) Newark, NJ. Administrative Law Judge Arthur J. Amchan issued his decision on July 26, 2013. Charge filed by County Concrete Company.
To have the NLRB’s Weekly Summary of Cases delivered to your inbox each week, please subscribe here.