Danbury Ambulance Service, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 6, 2020

369 N.L.R.B. 68 (N.L.R.B. 2020)

369 NLRB No. 68
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex-
ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C.
20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can
be included in the bound volumes.
Danbury Ambulance Service, Inc. and New England
Health Care Employees Union, District 1199,
SEIU. Cases 01–CA–238987 and 01–CA–240229
May 6, 2020
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN RING AND MEMBERS KAPLAN
AND EMANUEL
The General Counsel seeks a default judgment in this
case pursuant to the terms of an informal settlement agree-
ment. Upon a charge and amended charge filed on April
3 and August 8, 2019, respectively, and a charge filed on
April 24, 2019, by New England Health Care Employees
Union, District 1199, SEIU (the Union), the General
Counsel issued a complaint on August 30, 2019, against
Danbury Ambulance Service, Inc. (the Respondent), al-
leging that it violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
The Respondent and the Union subsequently entered
into an informal settlement agreement, which the Regional
Director for Region 3 approved on September 23, 2019.
Among other things, the settlement agreement required
the Respondent to (1) post the Notice to Employees for 60
consecutive days in places where notices to employees are
customarily posted; (2) provide the Union information re-
quested on February 19, 2019; and (3) meet with the Un-
ion regarding the grievance filed by the Union relating to
George Previs’ termination. The settlement agreement
also contained the following provision:1
The Charged Party agrees that in case of non-compli-
ance with any of the terms of this Settlement Agreement
by the Charged Party . . . , and after 14 days’ notice from
the Regional Director of the National Labor Relations
Board of such non-compliance without remedy by the
Charged Party, the Regional Director will reissue the
complaint previously issued on August 29, 2019 in the
instant case(s). Thereafter, the General Counsel may file
a motion for default judgment with the Board on the al-
legations of the complaint. The Charged Party under-
stands and agrees that the allegations of the aforemen-
tioned complaint will be deemed admitted and its An-
swer to such complaint will be considered withdrawn.
The only issue that may be raised before the Board is
whether Charged Party defaulted on the terms of this
Settlement Agreement described above. The Board may
1 The settlement agreement inadvertently stated that the complaint
issued on August 29, 2019. We note that the date of issuance was August
30, 2019.
then, without the necessity of trial or any other proceed-
ing, find all allegations of the complaint to be true and
make findings of fact and conclusions of law consistent
with those allegations adverse to the Charged Party on
all issues raised by the pleadings. The Board may then
issue an order providing a full remedy for the violations
found as is appropriate to remedy such violations. The
parties further agree that a U.S. Court of Appeals Judg-
ment may be entered enforcing the Board order ex parte,
after service or attempted service upon Charged
Party/Respondent at the last address provided to the
General Counsel.
By letter dated September 24, 2019, the Region’s com-
pliance officer sent the Respondent a copy of the con-
formed settlement agreement, with a cover letter explain-
ing the remedial actions it was required to take in order to
comply. Thereafter, by letter dated February 28, 2020, the
Acting Regional Director notified the Respondent that it
had failed to comply with the terms of the settlement
agreement and that unless compliance was achieved
within 14 days (by March 13), the Acting Regional Direc-
tor would reissue the August 30, 2019 complaint and file
a motion for default judgment with the Board based on the
allegations in the complaint. Accordingly, pursuant to the
terms of the noncompliance provisions of the settlement
agreement, on March 18, 2020, the Acting Regional Di-
rector reissued the complaint.
On March 19, 2020, the General Counsel filed a Motion
for Default Judgment with the Board requesting that the
Board issue a Decision and Order against the Respondent
containing findings of fact and conclusions of law based
on the allegations in the reissued complaint, and that the
Board provide “an appropriate Remedial Order.” On
March 26, 2020, the Board issued an order transferring the
proceeding to the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why
the motion should not be granted. The Respondent did not
file a response. The allegations in the motion are therefore
undisputed.
Ruling on Motion for Default Judgment
According to the uncontroverted allegations in the mo-
tion for default judgment, the Respondent has failed to
comply with the terms of the settlement agreement. Con-
sequently, pursuant to the noncompliance provisions of
the settlement agreement set forth above, we find that all
of the allegations of the complaint are true.2 Accordingly,
we grant the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judg-
ment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
2 See U-Bee, Ltd., 315 NLRB 667 (1994).
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD2
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent has been a corpo-
ration with an office and place of business in Danbury,
Connecticut (its facility), where it provides ambulatory
services. Annually, the Respondent, in conducting its op-
erations described above, purchases and receives at its
Danbury, Connecticut facility goods valued in excess of
$50,000 directly from points outside the State of Connect-
icut.
We find that the Respondent is an employer engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7)
of the Act, and that New England Health Care Employees
Union, District 1199, SEIU (the Union) is a labor organi-
zation within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
1. At all material times, Joseph DeSimone held the po-
sition of the Respondent’s owner and/or president and/or
CEO and has been a supervisor of the Respondent within
the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act and an agent of
the Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the
Act.
2. About April 18, 2019, the Respondent, by Joseph
DeSimone, in a telephone call, interfered with an em-
ployee’s Section 7 rights by denigrating the Union and
blaming the Union for failing to return an employee to
work.
3. The following employees of the Respondent (the
unit) constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of
the Act.
All full-time and regular part-time and per diem Em-
ployees, including EMTs, EMT-intermediates, EMT-
paramedics, dispatchers and chair car drivers. Excluded
from the bargaining unit are office Employees, mechan-
ics, guards, professional and confidential Employees,
and supervisors as defined in the Labor Management
Relations Act of 1947, as amended.
4. At all material times, the Respondent has recognized
the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of the unit. This recognition has been embodied
in successive collective-bargaining agreements, the most
recent of which was effective from March 10, 2014, to
March 10, 2017.
5. At all material times, based on Section 9(a) of the
Act, the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargain-
ing representative of the unit.
6. Since about February 19, 2019, the Union has re-
quested, in writing, that the Respondent furnish the Union
with the following information:
Pursuant to the termination grievance filed on behalf of
George Previs III please send the following information:
 The incident and/or behavior that led to the
Employee's termination, including any disci-
plinary or investigatory paperwork associated
with the allegation and/or discipline that was
issued;
 Any and all statements obtained during your
investigation into the discipline issued;
 Any and all notes and/or reports made during
your investigation (including any related re-
ports to the state regarding the incident, if ap-
plicable);
 Any record of past discipline and/or counsel-
ing of the grievant;
 Any counseling, in-services, and/or records of
trainings related to the matter the grievant was
disciplined for;
 Information on what disciplinary actions your
agency has taken in the past 3-4 years for the
same infractions;
 A copy of the performance evaluations, letters
of support, from the grievant’s personnel file;
 All documents that will be submitted at the
grievance hearing to justify the employer's dis-
ciplinary actions.
7. The information requested by the Union is necessary
for, and relevant to, the Union’s performance of its duties
as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of
the unit.
8. Since about February 19, 2019, the Respondent, by
Joseph DeSimone, has failed and refused to furnish the
Union with the information requested by it.
9. Since about February 20, 2019, the Respondent, by
DeSimone, has failed and refused to meet with the Union
regarding an employee’s termination grievance.
10. About April 18, 2019, Respondent, by DeSimone,
in a telephone call, bypassed the Union and dealt directly
with its employees in the unit by soliciting an employee to
withdraw a grievance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. By the conduct described above in paragraph 2, the
Respondent has been interfering with, restraining, and
DANBURY AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC. 3
coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights guar-
anteed in Section 7 of the Act in violation of Section
8(a)(1) of the Act.
2. By the conduct described above in paragraphs 8, 9
and 10, the Respondent has been failing and refusing to
bargain collectively and in good faith with the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of its employees in
violation of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
3. The unfair labor practices of the Respondent de-
scribed above affect commerce within the meaning of Sec-
tion 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in cer-
tain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to take certain
affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the
Act, as requested by the General Counsel. Specifically,
having found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1)
of the Act by interfering with employees’ Section 7 rights
by denigrating the Union and blaming the Union for fail-
ing to return employees to work, we will order the Re-
spondent to cease and desist from such conduct and to post
a remedial notice. Having found that the Respondent vio-
lated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act by failing and re-
fusing to meet with the Union regarding employee George
Previs’ termination grievance and bypassing the Union
and dealing directly with its employees in the unit by so-
liciting an employee to withdraw a grievance, we shall or-
der the Respondent to meet with the Union concerning the
grievance the Union filed regarding Previs’ termination.
And having found that the Respondent violated Section
8(a)(5) and (1) by failing and refusing to furnish the Union
with necessary and relevant information requested since
about February 19, 2019, we shall order the Respondent
to provide the Union with the requested information.
In addition, we take this opportunity to announce and
implement a temporary change in the Board’s standard no-
tice-posting remedy to adapt to the ongoing Coronavirus
pandemic.3 The standard notice-posting provision re-
quires respondents to post copies of the remedial notice
within 14 days after the notice is served on the respondent
by the regional office. With so many businesses closed
due to the pandemic, however, this requirement needs to
be modified. It seems likely that many respondents may
be unable to comply with the standard 14-day posting
deadline. Furthermore, even if the notice could be posted
in time, the whole point of the remedy will be defeated if
employees (or members in union-respondent cases) are
not present to read the notice. Accordingly, for the time
3 The Board has broad discretionary authority under Sec. 10(c) of the
Act to fashion remedies that will best effectuate the policies of the Act,
and remedial matters are traditionally within the Board’s province and
being, we will omit from the notice-posting remedy the
requirement that the notice be posted “within 14 days after
service by the Region.” Instead, we will provide that the
notice must be posted within 14 days after the facility in-
volved in the proceedings reopens and a substantial com-
plement of employees have returned to work, and that it
may not be posted until a substantial complement of em-
ployees have returned. In addition, employers that cus-
tomarily communicate with their employees by electronic
means may not be doing so while their businesses remain
closed. Thus, any pandemic-related delay in the physical
posting of paper notices will also apply to electronic dis-
tribution of the notice. These changes do not apply to re-
spondents whose facilities remain open and staffed by a
substantial complement of employees despite the pan-
demic. When conditions warrant, we will reinstate the
standard language.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Re-
spondent, Danbury Ambulance Service, Inc., Danbury,
Connecticut, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Interfering with, restraining, and coercing employ-
ees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act by denigrating New England Health Care Employ-
ees Union, District 1199, SEIU (the Union) and blaming
the Union for failing to return the Respondent’s employ-
ees to work.
(b) Failing and refusing to bargain collectively and in
good faith with the exclusive collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of the employees in the unit by failing and refus-
ing to meet with the Union regarding employees’ termina-
tion grievances and bypassing the Union and dealing di-
rectly with the employees in the unit by soliciting employ-
ees to withdraw grievances. The unit is:
All full-time and regular part-time and per diem Em-
ployees, including EMTs, EMT-intermediates, EMT-
paramedics, dispatchers and chair car drivers. Excluded
from the bargaining unit are office Employees, mechan-
ics, guards, professional and confidential Employees,
and supervisors as defined in the Labor Management
Relations Act of 1947, as amended.
(c) Failing and refusing to furnish the Union with the
information requested since February 19, 2019.
may be addressed sua sponte. Indian Hills Care Center, 321 NLRB 144,
144 fn. 3 (1996).
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD4
(d) In any like or related manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Meet with the Union regarding the grievance it filed
in relation to George Previs’ termination.
(b) Furnish to the Union, in a timely manner, the infor-
mation it requested on February 19, 2019.
(c) Post at its Danbury, Connecticut facility copies of
the attached notice marked “Appendix.”4 Copies of the
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Re-
gion 1, after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized
representative, shall be posted by the Respondent and
maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places,
including all places where notices to employees are cus-
tomarily posted. In addition to physical posting of paper
notices, notices shall be distributed electronically, such as
by email, posting on an intranet or an internet site, and/or
other electronic means, if the Respondent customarily
communicates with its employees by such means. The
Respondent shall take reasonable steps to ensure that the
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other
material. If the Respondent has gone out of business or
closed the facility involved in these proceedings, the Re-
spondent shall duplicate and mail, at its own expense, a
copy of the notice to all current employees and former em-
ployees employed by the Respondent at any time since
February 19, 2019.
(d) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file with
the Regional Director for Region 1 a sworn certification
of a responsible official on a form provided by the Region
attesting to the steps that the Respondent has taken to com-
ply.
Dated, Washington, D.C. May 6, 2020
John F. Ring, Chairman
_
Marvin E. Kaplan, Member
4 If the facility involved in these proceedings is open and staffed by a
substantial complement of employees, the notices must be posted within
14 days after service by the Region. If the facility involved in these pro-
ceedings is closed due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
pandemic, the notices must be posted within 14 days after the facility
reopens and a substantial complement of employees have returned to
work, and the notices may not be posted until a substantial complement
of employees have returned to work. Any delay in the physical posting
William J. Emanuel, Member
(SEAL) 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 vio-
lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey
this notice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join, or assist a union
Choose representatives to bargain with us on your
behalf
Act together with other employees for your bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected ac-
tivities.
WE WILL NOT interfere with, restrain, or coerce employ-
ees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act by denigrating New England Health Care Employ-
ees Union, District 1199, SEIU (the Union) and blaming
the Union for failing to return our employees to work.
WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to bargain collectively and
in good faith with the exclusive collective-bargaining rep-
resentative of the employees in the unit by failing and re-
fusing to meet with the Union regarding employees’ griev-
ances and bypassing the Union and dealing directly with
the employees in the unit by soliciting employees to with-
draw grievances. The unit is:
All full-time and regular part-time and per diem Em-
ployees, including EMTs, EMT-intermediates, EMT-
paramedics, dispatchers and chair car drivers. Excluded
from the bargaining unit are office Employees, mechan-
ics, guards, professional and confidential Employees,
and supervisors as defined in the Labor Management
Relations Act of 1947, as amended.
WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to furnish the Union with
the information it requested on February 19, 2019.
of paper notices also applies to the electronic distribution of the notice if
the Respondent customarily communicates with its employees by elec-
tronic means. 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
National Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board.”
DANBURY AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC. 5
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights
listed above.
WE WILL meet with the Union regarding the grievance
it filed in relation to George Previs’ termination.
WE WILL furnish to the Union, in a timely manner, the
information it requested on February 19, 2019.
DANBURY AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC.
The Board’s decision can be found at
https://www.nlrb.gov/case/01-CA-238987 or by using the
QR code below. Alternatively, you can obtain a copy of
the decision from the Executive Secretary, National Labor
Relations Board, 1015 Half Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.
20570, or by calling (202) 273-1940.