United States Postal Service

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 26, 2014

10-CA-124089 (N.L.R.B. Sep. 26, 2014)

1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
and Case 10-CA-124089
AMERICAN POSTAL WORKERS’
UNION, AFL-CIO
ORDER1
The Employer’s petition to revoke subpoena duces tecum B-1-HTAYRJ is
denied. The subpoenas seek information relevant to the matters under investigation
and describe with sufficient particularity the evidence sought, as required by Section
11(1) of the Act and Section 102.31(b) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations.2 Further,
the Employer has failed to establish any other legal basis for revoking the subpoenas.3
See generally NLRB v. North Bay Plumbing, Inc., 102 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 1996); NLRB

1 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a
three-member panel.
2 Member Johnson would grant the Employer’s petition in part by limiting the scope of
paragraph 5 to those materials in the possession of the Employer’s supervisors and
agents at the Duluth, Georgia facility or in the possession of supervisors, agents, Media
Relations Specialists, and/or Corporate Communications Specialists who were present
at union protests that occurred in Georgia on March 4, 9, 11, or 15, 2014. He would do
so without prejudice to the Region’s right to issue a new subpoena seeking additional
information if the information provided by the Employer under the instant subpoena, as
limited, was insufficient to resolve the matter at issue and if the Region can establish
that a search from a larger set of supervisors and agents is warranted.
3 To the extent that the Employer has provided some of the requested material, it is not
required to produce that information again, provided that the Employer accurately
describes which documents under subpoena it has already provided, states whether
those previously-supplied documents constitute all of the responsive documents, and
provides all of the information that was subpoenaed.
2
v. Carolina Food Processors, Inc., 81 F.3d 507 (4th Cir. 1996).
Dated, Washington, D.C., September 26, 2014.
PHILIP A. MISCIMARRA, MEMBER
KENT. Y. HIROZAWA, MEMBER
HARRY I. JOHNSON, III, MEMBER