Summary of NLRB Decisions for Week of April 6 - 10, 2020
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
Rogan Brothers Sanitation, Inc. and R&S Waste Services, LLC, a single employer and/or successor and Waste Services, Inc., and ECSI America, Inc., a single employer, and R&S Waste Services, LLC, alter egos and/or R&S Waste Services, LLC, and Waste Services, Inc., a successor and Teamsters Local 813, International Brotherhood of Teamsters (02‒CA‒040028, et al.; 369 NLRB No. 53) Yonkers, NY, April 9, 2020.
In this compliance proceeding, the Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion to Strike Portions of the Respondents’ amended answer to the Consolidated Compliance Specification and for Partial Summary Judgment on the basis that the Respondents’ amended answer attempted to raise matters that had been decided in the underlying unfair labor practice proceedings and was inadequate under the Board’s Rules and Regulations. Specifically, the Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to find that R&S Waste Services, LLC, is derivatively liable for the unfair labor practices in Rogan Bros. Sanitation Inc., 357 NLRB 1655 (2011) (“Rogan Brothers I”), as a successor defined by Golden State Bottling Co. v. NLRB, 414 U.S. 168 (1973), to Rogan Brothers. The Board further found that Waste Services, Inc. is derivatively liable for the unfair labor practices in both Rogan Brothers I and Rogan Bros. Sanitation, Inc., 362 NLRB 547 (2015), as the Golden State successor to R&S Waste Services, LLC. The Board also granted the General Counsel’s Motion to Strike several paragraphs of the Respondents’ amended answer and deemed admitted the corresponding paragraphs in the amended compliance specification.
Charges filed by International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 813. Chairman Ring and Members Kaplan and Emanuel participated.
***
First American Enterprises d/b/a Heritage Lakeside (18–CA–211284, et al.; 369 NLRB No. 54) Rice Lake, WI, April 9, 2020.
The Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge’s conclusions that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) by promulgating, disseminating, and/or enforcing a new policy prohibiting conversations other than those that are “resident-centered” in working areas; threatening employees not to engage in union activities; and maintaining a “Non-disclosure” policy in its Employee Handbook that prohibits employees from discussing salary or wage information. The Board also adopted the judge’s dismissal of the allegations that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) by asking an employee whether she still wanted to be in the Union; repeatedly telling an employee that employees need to vote “no” in the election; and, on the morning of the election, telling two employees that voting for union representation is incompatible with having a good relationship with their supervisor.
The Board reversed the judge to find that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) when its manager solicited an employee to “work on” another employee to get her to vote against the Union. The Board also reversed the judge to find that the Respondent did not violate Section 8(a)(1) when its Administrator asked an employee about a union-related conversation with another employee.
A Board majority (Members Kaplan and Emanuel) reversed the judge to find that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) when its Administrator told an employee to keep confidential their conversation about that employee’s union-related discussion with another employee. The majority found that the employee’s right to discuss the interaction with her coworkers outweighed the Respondent’s asserted business justification. Dissenting, Chairman Ring would have found that, given the assurances made by the Administrator, the confidentiality request did not violate the Act.
Finally, the Board adopted the judge’s recommendation that the election be set aside, and severed and remanded the representation case to the Regional Director for further appropriate action.
Charges filed by United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1189. Administrative Law Judge Arthur J. Amchan issued his decision on February 7, 2019. Chairman Ring and Members Kaplan and Emanuel participated.
***
Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases
R Cases
HMH Residential Care, Inc., d/b/a Meridian Nursing and Rehabilitation at Shrewsbury (22-RD-243803) Shrewsbury, NJ, April 6, 2020. The Board granted the Employer’s and Petitioner’s Requests for Review of the Regional Director’s administrative dismissal of the decertification petition. Upon review, the Board found that the Regional Director erred in dismissing the petition based on his conclusion that the Petitioner had not submitted a sufficient, original showing of interest. The Board found that principles set out in earlier cases required the Regional Director to permit the Petitioner to avail herself of the original showing of interest filed in a prior decertification case involving the same parties. The Board reinstated the petition and remanded the case to the Regional Director for further appropriate action. Petitioner—an Individual. Union—1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East. Members Kaplan and Emanuel participated. Chairman Ring, who was recused, was a member of the panel but did not participate in the decision on the merits.
Bluepearl Vet, LLV, Bluepearl Washington, LLC and Bluepearl Practice Entity, P.C., Joint Employers Collectively d/b/a Bluepearl Specialty and Emergency Pet Hospital (19-UC-239832) Seattle, WA, April 10, 2020. The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Order Clarifying Unit as it raised no substantial issues warranting review. The Regional Director had concluded that the Shift Supervisors are not supervisors under Section 2(11) of the Act. The Board also denied the Employer’s request for extraordinary relief as moot. Union—National Veterinary Professionals Union. Chairman Ring and Members Kaplan and Emanuel participated.
C Cases
Green JobWorks, LLC (05-CA-168637) Baltimore, MD, April 6, 2020. In this test-of-certification case, the Board denied the Charging Party’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Board’s Order Denying Motion and Remanding, reported at 369 NLRB No. 20 (2020). The Board found that the Charging Party had not identified any material error or demonstrated extraordinary circumstances warranting reconsideration. Charge filed by Construction and Master Laborers’ Local Union 11, a/w Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA). Chairman Ring and Members Kaplan and Emanuel participated.
Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc. d/b/a Coserv Electric (16-CA-149330) Corinth, TX, April 7, 2020. No exceptions having been filed to the February 4, 2020 decision of Administrative Law Judge Robert A. Ringler’s finding that the Respondent had engaged in certain unfair labor practices, the Board adopted the judge’s findings and conclusions, and ordered the Respondent to take the action set forth in the judge’s recommended Order. Charge filed by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 220, a/w International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
Providence Health and Services Washington d/b/a Providence St. Peter Hospital (19-CA-222331) Olympia, WA, April 8, 2020. 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. The complaint had alleged Section 8(a)(5) and (1) refusal-to-provide/delay-in-providing relevant information violations. Charge filed by Service Employees International Union, SEIU 1199NW. Chairman Ring and Members Kaplan and Emanuel participated.
Imerys Carbonates USA, Inc. (10-CA-232952, et al.) Whitestone, GA, April 10, 2020. No exceptions having been filed to the February 26, 2020 decision of Administrative Law Judge Arthur J. Amchan’s finding that the Respondent had engaged in certain unfair labor practices, the Board adopted the judge’s findings and conclusions, and ordered the Respondent to take the action set forth in the judge’s recommended Order. Charges filed by an individual and United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO.
***
Appellate Court Decisions
No Appellate Court Decisions involving Board Decisions to report.
***
Administrative Law Judge Decisions
No ALJ Decisions Issued.
***
To have the NLRB’s Weekly Summary of Cases delivered to your inbox each week, please subscribe here.