Sheehy Enterprizes, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 12, 2010

355 N.L.R.B. 478 (N.L.R.B. 2010)

DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
355 NLRB No. 83
478
Sheehy Enterprizes, Inc. and Laborers’ International
Union of North America, State of Indiana Dis-
trict Council, a/w Laborers’ International Union
of North America. Case 25–CA–30583
August 12, 2010
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN LIEBMAN AND MEMBERS SCHAUMBER
AND BECKER
On January 30, 2009, the two sitting members of the
Board issued a Decision and Order in this proceeding,
which is reported at 353 NLRB 803 (2009).1 Thereafter,
the Respondent filed a petition for review in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and the
General Counsel filed a cross-petition for enforcement.
On April 20, 2010, the court of appeals denied the Re-
spondent’s petition for review and granted the General
Counsel’s cross-petition for enforcement. 602 F.3d 839.

1 Effective midnight December 28, 2007, Members Liebman,
Schaumber, Kirsanow, and Walsh delegated to Members Liebman,
Schaumber, and Kirsanow, as a three-member group, all of the powers
of the National Labor Relations Board in anticipation of the expiration
of the terms of Members Kirsanow and Walsh on December 31, 2007.
Thereafter, pursuant to this delegation, the two sitting members issued
decisions and orders in unfair labor practice and representation cases.
On June 17, 2010, the United States Supreme Court
issued its decision in New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB,
130 S.Ct. 2635, holding that under Section 3(b) of the
Act, in order to exercise the delegated authority of the
Board, a delegee group of at least three members must be
maintained. Thereafter, on July 21, 2010, the court of
appeals granted a petition for rehearing and remanded
this case to the Board “so that a properly constituted
panel can resolve this dispute.”
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.2
The Board has considered the judge’s decision and the
record in light of the exceptions and briefs and has de-
cided to affirm the judge’s rulings, findings, and conclu-
sions and to adopt the recommended Order to the extent
and for the reasons stated in the decision reported at 353
NLRB 803, which is incorporated herein by reference.3

2 Consistent with the Board's general practice in cases remanded
from the courts of appeals, and for reasons of administrative economy,
the panel includes the members who participated in the original deci-
sion. Furthermore, under the Board’s standard procedures applicable to
all cases assigned to a panel, the Board Members not assigned to the
panel had the opportunity to participate in the adjudication of this case
at any time up to the issuance of this decision.
3 We find it unnecessary to rely on Sawgrass Auto Mall, 353 NLRB
436 (2008), cited in fn. 1 of the prior decision.