Seattle-First National Bank

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Seattle-First National Bank and Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, Chartered by United Food and Commercial Workers Interna- tional Union, AFL-CIO.' Case 19 CA 11364 September 28, 1979 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS MURPHY AND TRUESDALE Upon a charge filed on May 8, 1979, by Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union, and duly served on Seattle-First National Bank, herein called Respondent, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Re- gional Director for Region 19, issued a complaint and notice of hearing on May 21, 1979, against Respon- dent, alleging that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting com- merce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, as amended. Copies of the charge, com- plaint, and notice of hearing before an administrative law judge were duly served on the parties to this pro- ceeding. With respect to the unfair labor practices, the com- plaint alleges in substance that on April 5, 1979, fol- lowing a hearing in Case 19-AC-23, the Board issued its Decision and Amendment of Certification (241 NLRB 751), amending the certification in Cases 19- RM-816 and 19-RC-5301 by substituting "Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by Retail Clerks Internationl Union, AFL- CIO," for "Firstbank Independent Employees Asso- ciation," herein called FIEA, as the certified bargain- ing representative of the employees of Respondent in the unit found appropriate in Cases 19-RM-816 and 19-RC-5301, 2 and that commencing on or about April 5, 1979, and at all times thereafter, Respondent has refused, and continues to date to refuse, to bar- gain collectively with the Union as the exclusive bar- gaining representative, although the Union has re- ' The General Counsel moved to amend the name of the Charging Party. Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by Retail Clerks International Union, AFL-CIO, to reflect the current name of the International Union. We hereby grant that motion. 2 Official notice is taken of the records in the representation and amend- ment of certification proceedings, Cases 19 RM-816, 19-RC-5301, and 19- AC-23, as the term "record" is defined in Sees. 102.68 and 102.69(g) of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended. See LTV Electrosys- tets, Inc., 166 NLRB 938 (1967), enfd. 388 F.2d 683 (4th Cir. 1968): Golden Age Beverage Co., 167 NLRB 151 (1967), enfd. 415 F.2d 26 (5th Cir. 1969): Inlertype Co. v. Penello, 269 F.Supp. 573 (D.C.Va. 1967); Follett Corp., 164 NLRB 378 (1967), enfd. 397 F.2d 91 (7th Cir. 1968): and Sec. 9(d) of the NLRA, as amended. quested and is requesting it to do so. On May 31, 1979, Respondent filed its answer to the complaint admitting in part, and denying in part, the allegations in the complaint. It also filed an application for sub- poena duces ecum. The Union filed a response to that application. Thereafter, the Union filed a motion for an appropriate remedy, and Respondent filed a re- sponse. On June 12, 1979, counsel for the General Counsel filed directly with the Board a Motion for Summary Judgment. Subsequently, on June 19, 1979, the Board issued an order transferring the proceeding to the Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment should not be granted. Respondent thereafter filed a response to the Notice To Show Cause. 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 for Summary Judgment In its answers to the notice and the complaint, Re- spondent, in effect, is attempting to relitigate the is- sues raised in the amendment of certification proceed- ing. However, Respondent also argues that it has new evidence showing, inter alia, that officers of FIEA have been replaced, that statements made by the Union before the affiliation vote have proved un- founded or inaccurate, and that it has possession of numerous petitions from employees indicating that they disagree with the way the affiliation vote was conducted. Respondent, therefore, contends that if the complaint is not dismissed, it should be granted a hearing.3 We reject this contention. In Amoco, supra, the Board held that a union affiliation proceeding was essentially an internal union matter in which the Board will generally not involve itself. Under Amoco the alleged new evidence, even if adduced and cred- ited, would have no effect on the validity of the affili- ation vote. We therefore find that Respondent has not raised any issues which is properly litigable in this unfair labor practice proceeding. Accordingly, we grant the Motion for Summary Judgment.4 On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes the following: Respondent also argues that the Board Decision in Amoco Production Company. 239 NLRB 1195 (1979) (Member Truesdale concumng Members Jenkins and Penello dissenting separately), should not be applied retroac- tively. However. Respondent has failed to demonstrate how the application of Amoco, supra, would be an unjust burden on Respondent. 4 The Union's motion for attorneys' fees and other expenses, however, is hereby denied because we cannot conclude that Respondent's defense was "patently frivolous." Heck's In.. 215 NLRB 765 (1964). 245 NLRB No. 88 700 SEATTLE-FIRST NATIONAL BANK FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT Respondent is a banking association with an office and place of business in Seattle, Washington, where it is engaged in commercial banking and services. Dur- ing the past 12 months, a representative period, Re- spondent has provided services valued in excess of $50,000 directly to customers outside the State of Washington. We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Respon- dent is and has been at all times material herein, an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Sectin 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it will effec- tuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. The Representation Proceeding I. The unit The following employees of Respondent constitute a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining purposes within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All employees employed by Respondent in the State of Washington, excluding officers, manage- ment trainees, professional employees, confiden- tial employees, and supervisors and guards as de- fined in the Act. 2. The certification On April 5, 1979, the Board amended the certifica- tion in Case 19-AC-23 to substitute the Union for FIEA as the bargaining representative of the employ- ees in said unit for the purpose of collective bargain- ing with Respondent. Since April 5, 1979, the Union has been and continues to be the exclusive represent- ative of the employees in said unit within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. B. The Request To Bargain and Respondent's Refusal Commencing on or about April 5, 1979, and at all times thereafter, the Union has requested Respondent to bargain collectively with it as the exclusive collec- tive-bargaining representative of all the employees in the above-described unit. Commencing on or about April 5, 1979, and continuing at all times thereafter to date, Respondent has refused, and continues to re- fuse, to recognize and bargain with the Union as the exclusive representative for collective bargaining of all employees in said unit. Accordingly, we find that Respondent has, since April 5, 1979, and at all times thereafter, refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of the employees in the appropriate unit and that, by such refusal, Respondent has en- gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (I) of the Act. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of Respondent set forth in section 111I, above, occurring in connection with its operations described in section I. above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and com- merce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY Having found that Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean- ing of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom, and, upon request, bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of all employees in the ap- propriate unit, and if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts and the entire record, makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Seattle-First National Bank, State of Washing- ton, is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by United Food and Com- mercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. All employees employed by Respondent in the State of Washington, excluding officers, management trainees, professional employees, confidential employ- ees, and supervisors and guards as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col- 701 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act. 4. Since November 30, 1970, the above-named la- bor organization as amended on April 5, 1979, has been and now is the certified and exclusive represent- ative of all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. 5. By refusing on or about April 5, 1979, and at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively with the above-named labor organization as the exclusive bar- gaining representative of all the employees of Re- spondent in the appropriate unit, Respondent has en- gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(aX5) of the Act. 6. By the aforesaid refusal to bargain, Respondent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced, and is interfering with, restraining, and coercing, employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them in Sec- tion 7 of the Act and thereby has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(l) of the Act. 7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the mean- ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Rela- tions Board hereby orders that Respondent, Seattle- First National Bank, Seattle, Washington, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning rates of pay, wages, and other terms and conditions of employment with Financial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees in the following appropriate unit: All employees employed by Respondent in the State of Washington, excluding officers, manage- ment trainees, professional employees, confiden- tial employees, and supervisors and guards as de- fined in the Act. (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Upon request, bargain with the above-named labor organization as the exclusive representative of all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, and if an understand- ing is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. (b) Post at its various locations where bargaining unit employees are employed copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix."5 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 19, after being duly signed by Respondent's repre- sentative, shall be posted by Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, in- cluding all places where notices to employees are cus- tomarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 19, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps have been taken to comply herewith. 5 In the event that this Order is enforced by a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order of the National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a Judg- ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the Na- tional Labor Relations Board." APPENDIX NOTICE To EMPLOYEES POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with Finan- cial Institution Employees of America, Local No. 1182, chartered by United Food and Com- mercial Workers International Union. AFL- CIO, as the exclusive representative of the em- ployees in the bargaining unit described below. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act. WE WILL, upon request, bargain with the above-named Union, as the exclusive representa- tive of all employees in the bargaining unit de- scribed below, with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, and if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agree- ment. The bargaining unit is: All employees employed by the Employer in the State of Washington, excluding officers, management trainees, professional employees, confidential employees, and supervisors and guards as defined in the Act. SEATTLE-FIRST NATIONAL BANK 702