Bunting Bearing Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 29, 2007

351 N.L.R.B. 62 (N.L.R.B. 2007)

351 NLRB No. 62
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.
Bunting Bearing Corp. and United Steel, Paper and
Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Al-
lied Industrial and Service Workers Interna-
tional Union, AFL–CIO. Cases 7–CA–43996, 7–
CA–44208–1, 7–CA–44266-1, 7–CA–44266–2, 7–
CA–44614, and 7–CA–44794
November 29, 2007
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN BATTISTA AND MEMBERS LIEBMAN
AND SCHAUMBER
The General Counsel seeks default judgment in this
case on the ground that the Respondent has failed to file
an answer to the compliance specification.
On May 14, 2007, the Board issued a Supplemental
Decision and Order1 that, among other things, ordered
the Respondent to make whole employees for lost earn-
ings and benefits resulting from the Respondent’s unfair
labor practices in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of
the Act.
A controversy having arisen over the amount of back-
pay due the discriminatees under the Board’s Order, on
August 16, 2007, the Regional Director issued a compli-
ance specification and notice of hearing specifying the
amounts due under the Board’s Order. The compliance
specification notified the Respondent that it should file
an answer by September 6, 2007, complying with the
Board’s Rules and Regulations. Although properly
served with a copy of the compliance specification, the
Respondent failed to file an answer.
By letter dated September 7, 2007, the Region advised
the Respondent that no answer to the compliance specifi-
cation had been received and that unless an answer was
filed by September 14, 2007, a motion for default judg-
ment would be filed. To date, the Respondent has not
filed an answer.

1 349 NLRB No. 99 (2007). This decision supersedes the Decision
and Order reported at 343 NLRB 479 (2004), in which the Board or-
dered the Respondent, among other things, to make whole employee
Todd McNett for his unlawful discharge. The Board, however, dis-
missed the allegation that the Respondent unlawfully locked out certain
other employees. By order dated April 28, 2006, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the
lockout was unlawful and remanded the case to the Board to determine
whether the subsequent decertification petition was tainted by the lock-
out, and if so, whether the Respondent’s withdrawal of recognition and
refusal to bargain was unlawful. 179 Fed. Appx. 61 (D.C. Cir. 2006)
(unpublished). On remand, the Board found that the subsequent decer-
tification petition was tainted by the lockout, and that the Respondent
unlawfully withdrew recognition and refused to bargain with the Union.
On September 24, 2007, the General Counsel filed
with the Board a motion for default judgment, with ex-
hibits attached. On September 27, 2007, the Board is-
sued 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 and in the compliance specifi-
cation are therefore undisputed.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on the Motion for Default Judgment
Section 102.56(a) of the Board’s Rules and Regula-
tions provides that a respondent shall file an answer
within 21 days from service of a compliance specifica-
tion. Section 102.56(c) provides that if the respondent
fails to file an answer to the specification within the time
prescribed by this section, the Board may, either with or
without taking evidence in support of the allegations of
the specification and without further notice to the re-
spondent, find the specification to be true and enter such
order as may be appropriate.
According to the uncontroverted allegations of the mo-
tion for default judgment, the Respondent, despite having
been advised of the filing requirements, has failed to file
an answer to the compliance specification. In the absence
of good cause for the Respondent’s failure to file an an-
swer, we deem the allegations in the compliance specifi-
cation to be admitted as true, and grant the General
Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment. Accordingly,
we conclude that the net backpay due the discriminatees
is as stated in the compliance specification and we will
order the Respondent to pay those amounts to the dis-
criminatees, plus interest accrued to the date of payment.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Bunting Bearings Corp., Kalamazoo,
Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall make whole the individuals named below, by pay-
ing them the amounts following their names, plus interest
accrued to the date of payment, as prescribed in New
Horizons for the Retarded, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987), mi-
nus tax withholdings required by Federal and State laws:
Ackley, George $ 1,484.73
Alworden, Ron 1,413.03
Arndt, Rob 1,314.72
Asakevich, Lee 1,183.20
Barnes, Russell 1,218.00
Blett, Shurie 1,304.16
Cook, Terry 1,188.30
Davis, Mickey 1,252.80
Edgerton, Chris 1,274.40
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD2
Fisher, Jeffrey 1,413.03
Frehlin, Robert 1,148.40
Fuhrman, Shannon 1,009.92
Griffin, Patrick 1,132.80
Johnson, James 1,009.80
Kovach, Laura 1,136.16
Lemmers, Robert 1,434.24
Lemmers, Sue 1,269.00
Prince, Sue 991.80
Skinner, Alberta 1,009.92
Stonerock, Anna 1,291.68
Strong, James 1,353.24
Walker, James 1,278.06
Witt, John 1,166.88
TOTAL: $28,278.27
McNett, Todd 4,926.30
TOTAL BACKPAY: $33,204.57
Dated, Washington, D.C. November 29, 2007
Robert J. Battista, Chairman
Wilma B. Liebman, Member
Peter C. Schaumber, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD