Pipeline Construction Workers, Local 692

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1980

248 N.L.R.B. 1315 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, LOCAL 692 1315
Pipeline Construction Workers, Local 692 (Fulhgum
Construction Corporation) and Wayne Welch.
Case 15-CB-2195
April 21, 1980
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND TRUESDALE
Upon a charge filed on July 12, 1979, by Wayne
Welch, herein called the Charging Party, and duly
served on Pipeline Construction Workers, Local
692, herein called the Respondent,' the General
Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by
the Regional Director for Region 15, issued a com-
plaint and notice of hearing on August 31, 1979,
against Respondent, alleging that Respondent had
engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) and Section 2(6) and (7)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
Copies of the charge, complaint, and notice of
hearing before an administrative law judge were
duly served on the parties to this proceeding.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the
complaint alleges in substance that on or about
July 3, 1979, Respondent attempted to cause, and
caused, Fulghum Construction Corporation to dis-
charge employee Wayne Welch, a pipeline laborer
employed by Fulghum at its Eunice, Louisiana,
jobsite for reasons other than the failure to tender
periodic dues and initiation fees uniformly required
as a condition of acquiring or retaining membership
in Respondent, thereby attempting to cause, and
causing, Fulghum to discriminate against Welch in
violation of Section 8(a)(3) of the Act.
On September 17, 1979, Respondent filed a brief
position letter generally denying the allegations of
the complaint. Counsel for the General Counsel
telephoned Respondent's representative, Junior
Daigle, on December 11, 1979, to explain that the
September letter was not sufficiently specific and
asked that Respondent file a more specific re-
sponse. Daigle replied that the letter was a legally
sufficient answer and that he would file nothing
further. Counsel for the General Counsel con-
firmed the conversation in a letter mailed to Daigle
on December 14, 1979. No further response from
Respondent was received.
On December 18, 1979, counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a motion to
strike Respondent's answer, to transfer the case to
and continue the proceeding before the Board, and
I The charge was also duly served on Fulghum Construction Corpora-
tion, Welch's employer, not a respondent in this case; a copy of the com-
plaint and notice of hearing was served on Fulghum by ordinary mail.
248 NLRB No. 151
for summary judgment. He asserted that, under
Board law, the filing of a brief position letter gen-
erally denying the allegations of a complaint does
not comply with the specificity requirements of
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, and that the answer
was, therefore, legally inadequate and should be
stricken. He moved that the Board grant the
motion to find all allegations of the complaint to be
true, grant the Motion for Summary Judgment, and
issue an order finding all violations of the Act as
alleged. Thereafter, on January 2, 1980, the Board
issued an order transferring the proceeding to the
Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the Gen-
eral Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment
should not be granted. On January 16, 1980, the
Board granted Respondent an extension until Janu-
ary 31, 1980, for receipt of its response to the
Notice To Show Cause. Subsequently, on January
29, 1980, Respondent filed an answer to the Notice
To Show Cause, generally denying the allegations
in the complaint and reiterating its original conten-
tion that it had conducted its own investigation
which disclosed that the allegations were unfound-
ed and that Welch was terminated as a result of a
reduction in the work force, over which Respon-
dent exercised no control.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following:
Ruling on the Motion To Strike Respondent's
Answer
In its answer to the Notice To Show Cause, Re-
spondent asserts that it filed an answer denying the
allegations in the complaint, that it caused its own
investigation to be conducted, which disclosed that
the allegations are unfounded, that the termination
of Welch by Fulghum was a result of a reduction
in the work force at the Eunice, Louisiana, jobsite
over which Respondent had no control, and that
its answer creates a dispute as to issues of material
fact which would cause the granting of the Motion
for Summary Judgment to be improper and in con-
flict with the applicable laws, rules, and regula-
tions.
With regard to Respondent's answer, we shall
grant the General Counsel's motion to strike. Re-
spondent acknowledged receipt of the charge, and
was duly served with the complaint and notice of
hearing. Thereafter, counsel for the General Coun-
sel warned Respondent both orally and in writing
that its answer by brief letter was not sufficiently
1316 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATION BOARD
specific under the Board's Rules and Regulations
and suggested it file a more complete answer. 2 Re-
spondent informed counsel for the General Counsel
that it intended to file nothing further, and in fact
did not file another answer, as such.
The Board has the authority under the Act to es-
tablish resonable procedural rules regarding the
time and manner of filing an answer to a com-
plaint. Section 6 of the National Labor Relations
Act provides that the Board "shall have authority
. . . to make . . . in the manner prescribed by the
Administrative Procedure Act, such rules and reg-
ulations as may be necessary to carry out the pro-
visions of this Act." Pursuant to this provision, we
have promulgated rules regarding the filing of an
answer to a complaint. The reasons therefore are as
manifest here as in other judicial and administrative
proceedings: viz, to facilitate the joining of the
issues and reduce the area of litigation, and in
order that the rights of parties may be more quick-
ly established and wrongs sooner rectified,
Accordingly, we find that pursuant to the au-
thority granted the Board under the Act, our rules
governing the filing of answers to complaints are
valid and have the force and effect of law, and we
affirm our rules that, if a party charged with an
unfair labor practice in a complaint does not file an
answer within the time and in the manner pre-
scribed by such rules, all allegations in the com-
plaint shall be deemed to be admitted to be true
and may be so found by the Board, and judgment
may be rendered on the basis of the complaint
alone. 3 We find that Respondent's purported
answer is improper and does not comply with the
requirements of Section 102.20 of the Board's
Rules and Regulations. We further find that Re-
spondent's explanation with respect thereto in its
answer to the Notice To Show Cause does not
constitute good cause within the meaning of said
rule, as quoted below, and therefore does not cure
the defective answer. Accordingly, we grant the
General Counsel's motion to strike the answer.
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides as follows:
2 In the letter dated September 12, 1979, received by the Regional Di-
rector on September 17, 1979, Respondent stated:
After investigating this matter, we do not find any basis for a charge
as per Section 8(b), Subsections (I)(A) and (2) of the National Labor
Relations Act.
Very truly yours,
Junior Daigle
s Liquid Carbonic Corporation, 116 NLRB 795, 797 (1956); Neal B.
Scott Commodities, Inc., 238 NLRB No. 2 (1978).
The respondent shall, within 10 days from the
service of the complaint, file an answer there-
to. The respondent shall specifically admit,
deny, or explain each of the facts alleged in
the complaint, unless the respondent is without
knowledge, in which case the respondent shall
so state, such statement operating as a denial.
All allegations in the complaint, if no answer
is filed, or any allegation in the complaint not
specifically denied or explained in an answer
filed, unless the respondent shall state in the
answer that he is without knowledge, shall be
deemed to be admitted to be true and shall be
so found by the Board, unless good cause to
the contrary is shown.
The complaint and notice of hearing served on
Respondent specifically stated that unless an
answer is filed to the complaint within 10 days
from the service thereof "all of the allegations of
the complaint shall be deemed to be admitted to be
true and may be so found by the Board." Further,
according to the Motion for Summary Judgment ,
counsel for the General Counsel telephoned Re-
spondent's representative, Daigle, on December 11,
1979, and advised him that his September 12, 1979,
letter was not sufficiently specific and requested
that a more specific response be filed. Counsel for
the General Counsel confirmed the telephone con-
versation in a letter to Respondent, dated Decem-
ber 14, 1979. Respondent failed to file a valid
answer to the complaint. Thereafter, on December
18, 1979, no further response having been received,
counsel for the General Counsel filed the instant
Motion to Strike and Motion for Summary Judg-
ment.
As Respondent has not filed an answer accept-
able under the Board's Rules and Regulations
within 10 days from the service of the complaint,
and as no good cause for its failure to do so has
been shown, in accordance with the rule set forth
above and in light of its answer to the Notice To
Show Cause, the allegations of the complaint
herein stand undenied and are deemed to be ad-
mitted to be true, and are so found to be true. Ac-
cordingly, we grant the General Counsel's Motion
for Summary Judgment. On the basis of the entire
record, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer, Fulghum Construction Corpora-
tion, is, and has been at all times material herein, a
corporation duly organized under, and existing by
virtue of, the laws of the State of Kentucky, en-
gaged in the pipeline construction business, with a
----
PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, LOCAL 692 1317
construction site located in Eunice, Louisiana.
During the past year, a representative period,
Fulghum, in the course and conduct of its business,
purchased and received directly from points locat-
ed outside the State of Louisiana, goods and mate-
rials valued in excess of $50,000.
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that
Fulghum is, and has been all times material herein,
an employer engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and
that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to
assert jurisdiction herein.
11. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Respondent, Pipeline Construction Workers,
Local 692, is a labor organization within the mean-
ing of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE CHARGING PARTY
Wayne Welch is an employee within the mean-
ing of Section 2(3) of the Act.
IV. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
At all times material herein, the following indi-
viduals have been, and are now, agents of Respon-
dent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the
Act: Junior Daigle, president, and Daniel R.
Lovett, steward.
On or about July 3, 1979, Respondent, by its
agents Daigle and Lovett, attempted to cause, and
caused, Fulghum to terminate the employment of
employee Welch, a pipeline laborer employed by
Fulghum at its Eunice, Louisiana, jobsite, because
Welch refused to make a monetary contribution to
a voluntary fund being raised by Respondent. Re-
spondent thereby attempted to cause, and caused,
Fulghum to discriminate against Welch for reasons
other than the failure to tender periodic dues and
initiation fees uniformly required as a condition of
acquiring or retaining membership in Respondent.
Accordingly, we find that by the conduct de-
scribed in the above paragraph, Respondent has at-
tempted to cause, and caused, Fulghum to discrimi-
nate against Welch in violation of Section 8(a)(3) of
the Act, and that by such conduct has engaged in,
and is engaging in, unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(b)(l)(A) and (2) of the Act.
V. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR
PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent set forth in section
IV, above, occurring in connection with the oper-
ations of the Employer described in section I,
above, have a close, intimate, and substantial rela-
tionship to trade, traffic, and commerce among the
several States and tend to lead to labor disputes
burdening and obstructing commerce and the free
flow of commerce.
VI. THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) of the Act,
we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom,
and that it take certain affirmative action, set forth
below, which is designed to effectuate the purposes
and policies of the Act.
Specifically, we shall order that Respondent
Union be required to send a letter to the Charging
Party, with a copy to Fulghum Construction Cor-
poration, his former employer, stating that it has no
objection to his employment and will not question
his reemployment or reinstatement. We shall fur-
ther order Respondent to make Wayne Welch
whole for any loss of earnings suffered by reason
of its unlawful conduct by payment to him of the
sum of money equal to the amount that he would
have earned from the date of the discrimination
against him, less net earnings, during said period.
Respondent's backpay liability will terminate 5
days after it notifies the Employer and Welch that
it has no objection to Welch's employment by the
Employer. Backpay shall be computed in the
manner prescribed by the Board in F. W Wool-
worth Company, 90 NLRB 289 (1950), with interest
as prescribed in Florida Steel Corporation, 231
NLRB 651 (1977). 4
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Fulghum Construction Corporation is an em-
ployer engaged in commerce within the meaning of
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Respondent Pipeline Construction Workers,
Local 692, is a labor organization within the mean-
ing of Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. Wayne Welch is an employee within the
meaning of Section 2(3) of the Act.
4. By attempting to cause, and by causing,
Fulghum to discharge Wayne Welch in violation of
Section 8(a)(3) because he refused to make a mone-
tary contribution to a voluntary fund being raised
by Respondent, Respondent violated Section
8(b)(l)(A) and (2) of the Act.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 2(6)
and (7) of the Act.
I See, generally, Isis Plumbing Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962).
1318 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATION BOARD
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re-
lations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Pipeline Construction Workers, Local 692, its offi-
cers, agents, and representatives, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Attempting to cause, and causing, the dis-
charge of employees because they do not contrib-
ute to a fund being raised by Respondent to which
there is no obligation to contribute.
(b) In any like or related manner restraining or
coercing employees of Fulghum Construction Cor-
poration in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which
the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the
Act:
(a) Send a written notice to Wayne Welch, with
a copy to the Employer, stating that it has no ob-
jection to his employment, and will not question
his reemployment or reinstatement.
(b) Make Wayne Welch whole for any loss of
earnings suffered by reason of Respondent's unlaw-
ful discrimination against him in the manner pro-
vided above in the section of the Decision and
Order entitled "The Remedy."
(c) Post at at its offices at Baton Rouge, Louisi-
ana, copies of the attached notice marked "Appen-
dix."5 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by
the Regional Director for Region 15, after being
duly signed by Respondent's representative, shall
be posted by Respondent immediately upon receipt
thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive
days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all
places where notices to members are customarily
posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respon-
dent to insure that said notices are not altered, de-
faced, or covered by any other material.
5 In the event that 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 Pursu-
ant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an
Order of the National Labor Relations Board "
(d) Sign and deliver sufficient copies of said
notice to the Regional Director for Region 15 for
posting by Fulghum Construction Corporation at
its Eunice, Louisiana, site where notices to its em-
ployees are customarily posted, if said Employer is
willing to so post.
(e) Notify the Regional Director for Region 15,
in writing, within 20 days from the date of this
Order, what steps the have been taken to comply
herewith.
APPENDIX
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT attempt to cause or cause
Fulghum Construction Corporation to dis-
charge employees because they refuse to con-
tribute to a fund being raised by Pipeline Con-
struction Workers, Local 692, to which there
is no obligation to contribute.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner
restrain or coerce employees of Fulghum Con-
struction Corporation in the exercise of rights
guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL send a written notice to Wayne
Welch, with a copy to Fulghum Construction
Corporation, stating that we have no objection
to his employment, and will not question his
reemployment by Fulghum.
WE WILL make Wayne Welch whole for
any loss of earnings suffered by reason of our
unlawful conduct, with interest.
PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS,
LOCAL 692