Summary of NLRB Decisions for Week of January 10 - 14, 2022
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 the Executive Secretary at 202‑273‑1940.
Summarized Board Decisions
Jam Productions, Ltd., Event Productions, Inc., Standing Room Only, Inc., and Victoria Operating Co., a Single Employer (13-CA-284761; 371 NLRB No. 51) Chicago, IL, January 11, 2022.
The Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Summary Judgment in this test-of-certification case on the grounds that the Respondent failed to raise any issues that were not, or could not have been, litigated in the underlying representation proceeding in which the Union was certified as the bargaining representative. The Board found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by failing and refusing to recognize and bargain with the Union.
Charge filed by Theatrical Stage Employees Union Local No. 2, IATSE. Chairman McFerran and Members Kaplan and Ring participated.
Serenethos Care Center LLC d/b/a St. Christopher Convalescent Hospital (32-CA-277939; 371 NLRB No. 54) Hayward, CA, January 14, 2022.
The Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file an answer to the complaint. The Board found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by failing and refusing to bargain with the Union for a successor collective-bargaining agreement and refusing to furnish and unreasonably delaying in furnishing the Union with information that is necessary for, and relevant to, its role as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit.
Charge filed by Service Employees International Union, SEIU Local 2015. Members Kaplan, Wilcox, and Prouty participated.
American Postal Workers Union of Louisiana (United States Postal Service) (15-CB-241267, et al.; 371 NLRB No. 47) Baldwin, LA, January 14, 2022.
The Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file an answer to the consolidated complaint. The Board found that the Respondent violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) by failing to process and file the Charging Parties’ grievances.
Charges filed by individuals. Chairman McFerran and Members Ring and Wilcox participated.
Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases
No Unpublished R Cases Issued.
United States Postal Service (16-CA-257399, et al.) Humble and Rosenberg, TX, January 10, 2022. In this case alleging Section 8(a)(5) and (1) violations, the Board approved a formal settlement stipulation between the Respondent, the Charging Parties, and the General Counsel, and specified actions the Respondent must take to comply with the Act. Charges filed by American Postal Workers Union, Local Union 185, a/w American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO; an individual; and National Association of Letter Carriers, Branch 283. Members Ring, Wilcox, and Prouty participated.
United States Postal Service (07-CA-278962) Holland, MI, January 11, 2022. In this case alleging Section 8(a)(5) and (1) violations, the Board approved a formal settlement stipulation between the Respondent, the Charging Party, and the General Counsel, and specified actions the Respondent must take to comply with the Act. Charge filed by Western Michigan Area Local 281, American Postal Workers Union (APWU), AFL-CIO. Members Ring, Wilcox, and Prouty participated.
Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union, Local No. 37 (Frisco Baking Company) (31-CB-279889) Los Angeles, CA, January 14, 2022. The Board denied the Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment, finding that the Respondent failed to establish that there are no genuine issues of material fact warranting a hearing and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The denial was without prejudice to the Respondent’s right to renew its deferral arguments to the Administrative Law Judge, after presenting evidence, and to raise the deferral issue before the Board on exceptions, if appropriate. Charge filed by Frisco Baking Company. Members Ring, Wilcox, and Prouty participated.
Appellate Court Decisions
East Brunswick European Wax Center, LLC, Board Case No. 22-CA-178646 (reported at 369 NLRB No. 77) (3d Cir. decided January 11, 2022).
In a published opinion, the Court granted the petition for review filed by this operator of a beauty and waxing salon in East Brunswick, New Jersey, and denied enforcement. The Board (then-Chairman Ring and Members Kaplan and Emanuel) granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment pursuant to the terms of a settlement agreement after finding that the Employer failed to fully comply with the agreement’s terms. Specifically, the Board found that the Employer had not shown that it had sent the remedial notice to the employees by text message, as the agreement required, and instead sent them by email. Accordingly, under the terms of the agreement, the Board found that the Employer had admitted to the Section 8(a)(1) and (3) allegations in the complaint.
On review, the Court held that the Board erred in granting the Motion for Default Judgment and that the Board’s action in imposing a full remedy after entering default was punitive and thereby inconsistent with its obligations under the Act. Citing in-circuit precedent, the Court applied the principle that default judgments require “more exacting judicial scrutiny,” because “the possibility that an injustice” is more likely where “controversies are decided upon a procedural technicality instead of a ruling on the merits.” Thus, without giving deference to the Board’s decision, and dispensing with the usual abuse-of-discretion standard of review, the Court concluded that the Board erred in ordering a full remedy for what, in the Court’s view, was a relatively insignificant violation of the settlement agreement.
The Court’s opinion is here.
Administrative Law Judge Decisions
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 70 (United Parcel Service (UPS)) (32-CB-279104; JD(SF)-01-22) Oakland, CA. Administrative Law Judge Eleanor Laws issued her decision on January 14, 2022. Charge filed by an individual.
To have the NLRB’s Weekly Summary of Cases delivered to your inbox each week, please subscribe here.