Truck Drivers, Local 705

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 4, 1977

227 N.L.R.B. 694 (N.L.R.B. 1977)

694 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL- LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Truck Drivers, Oil Drivers, Filling Station and Plat- The Board has considered the entire record in this
form Workers' Union Local No. 705, affiliated with case, including-the parties' briefs, and hereby makes
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters , the following findings and conclusions.
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Ameri-
ca (Randolph Paper Company) and Frank Byers.
Case 13-CB-5790
January 4, 1977
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND
ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND PENELLO
On October 29, 1975, the National Labor Relations
Board issued its Decision and Order in the above-
entitled proceeding 1 fording that Respondent had
violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) of the Act by
causing the Employer, Randolph Paper Company, to
discriminate against employee Frank Byers in viola-
tion of Section 8(a)(3) of the Act. Accordingly, the
Board ordered the Respondent to notify the Employ-
er that it had no objection to Byers' continued
employment and to make Byers whole for any loss of
earnings suffered by reason of the discrimination
against him.2
Thereafter, on May 26, 1976, the General Counsel,
the Charging Party, and the Respondent Union
entered into a stipulation in which they agreed to
certain facts relevant to the issues in this proceeding.
They also agreed to waive a hearing before an
Administrative Law Judge, the issuance of an Ad-
ministrative Law Judge's decision, and the presenta-
tion of any evidence other than that contained in the
stipulation and the exhibits attached thereto. By
order dated August 12, 1976, the Board approved the
stipulation and transferred the proceeding to the
Board. Thereafter, the General Counsel and Respon-
dent filed briefs with the Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
1 221 NLRB 199
2 On February 10, 1976, Respondent, by stipulation , agreed that it would
not object to this order.
3 The Board found in its Decision of October 29, 1975, that Byers never
joined Respondent and paid no dues to it at any time during his employment
with Randolph Paper Company , notwithstanding the contractual require-
ment that all Randolph drivers had to become members of Respondent 30
days after their hire as a condition of continued employment . Instead, Byers
retained his 17-year membership in the Chicago Independent Union and
Randolph made health and welfare payments and remitted dues on Byers'
behalf to that union
4 Prior to the issuance of the Board's original Decision and Order herein,
it appears that Respondent at no time interposed any objection to Byers'
failure to pay dues to it or the arrangement whereby Randolph remitted dues
and benefit payments on his behalf to another union . Under these
227 NLRB No. 111
The Issue
The sole issue presented to the Board herein is
whether Respondent may offset against its backpay
obligation all or any part of dues payments allegedly
owed to Respondent by Charging Party from the date
of Charging Party's initial employment with the
Employer to the date of any order issued by the
Board.
The parties agree that Respondent's net liability is
$3,213.82 plus interest to the date of payment.
Respondent contends, however, that it is entitled to
offset against this sum union dues purportedly owed
it by Byers from his date of hire in the amount of
$939.3 For the reasons set forth below, we find no
merit in Respondent's contention.
The Board has consistently held that the matter of
collection of dues is an internal union affair except
where an employee's discharge is sought on 'the
grounds of failure to tender dues pursuant to a lawful
union-security clause, a circumstance not here ob-
taining. Respondent, by its asserted claim to setoff,
seeks to inject just such an internal union matter into
the instant proceedings and thus to litigate a private
cause of action allegedly accruing to it as a claimed
general creditor.4 The Act, however, neither confers
nor purports to confer private rights, but exists to
enforce the public interest in preventing and deter-
ring unfair labor practices.5 Thus, the backpay
remedy is not a private right, but is a public one
granted to vindicate the law against one who has
broken it; the object of the remedy is to discourage
discrimination against employees contrary to the
statute and thereby to vindicate the policies of the
Act .6 Consequently, Respondent is not permitted to
reduce the amount of backpay by the amount of its
private claim for dues.
Further, Respondent here seeks not only to set off
dues allegedly owing on and after the date of
discrimination, but in addition requests the Board to
set off, against its backpay obligation, dues allegedly
circumstances, to permit Respondent's claim of setoff for nonpayment of
dues might preclude consideration of a possibly meritorious defense to an
action in contract.
5 National Licorice Company v. N LR B., 309 U.S. 350, 362-366 (1940).
See also Agwilines, Inc. v. N.LRB., 87 F.2d 146, 150-151 (C.A. 5,1936); and
N L.RB v. Mooney Aircraft, Inc., 366 F.2d 809,811 (C.A. 5,1966).
6 Clayton-Willard Sales, 126 NLRB 1325 (1960). Thus employees may not
waive or settle backpay claims without approval of the Board , nor are such
awards subject to attachment or garnishment . See W. C. Nabors d/b/a W. C.
Nabors Co. v. N.LRB., 323 F.2d 686, 691 (C.A. 5, 1963) (waiver), cert.
denied 376 U.S. 911 ( 1964). Waterman Steamship Corporation v. N.LRB.,
119 F.2d 760, 762 (C.A. 5, 1941) (settlement); N L KB v. Sunshine Mining
Co., 125 F.2d 757 (C.A. 9, 1942) (attachment); N.LR.B. v. Al Schertzer d/b/a
A & P Import Company, 360 F.2d 152 (C.A. 2, 1966) (garnishment)
TRUCK DRIVERS, LOCAL 705
owing from the date of Byers' hire to the date of the
discriminatory layoff. It is clear that Respondent's
claim relative to the prediscrimination period bears
no relationship to the unfair labor practice which the
Board's backpay order is designed to remedy inas-
much as it is purely a contractual claim which neither
arises out of nor is otherwise related to Respondent's
backpay obligation. As to dues allegedly owing since
the date of discrimination, it fosters neither the public
interest in deterring unfair labor practices, nor the
public interest in fashioning a remedy designed to
"make whole" an employee for loss of pay suffered,
to set off dues for a period of time during which
Respondent has discriminated against an employee
contrary to the Act.
- In sum, we conclude that Respondent's claim to
setoff based on nonpayment of dues involves a
695
private debt which is irrelevant to these backpay
proceedings. Accordingly, we shall require the Re-
spondent to pay the full amount of backpay as
stipulated by the parties.
ORDER
Respondent, Truck Drivers, Oil Drivers, Filling
Station and Platform Workers' Union Local No. 705,
affiliated with the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers
of America, Chicago, Illinois, its officers, agents, and
representatives, shall pay to Frank Byers as net
backpay the sum of $3,213.82, together with 6-per-
cent interest thereon in accordance with Isis Plumb-
ing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962), until the
date of payment of all backpay.
1