Lodge No. 1129

630 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Lodge No. 1129, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO and Victoria Horwath and Sunbeam Appliance Company, Division of Sunbeam Corporation, Party to the Contract Lodge No. 1129, International Association of Machin- ists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO and International Association of Machinists and Aeros- pace Workers, District No. 8, AFL-CIO and Elizabeth Gaudry and Sunbeam Appliance Compa- ny, Division of Sunbeam Corporation, Party to the Contract. Cases 13-CB-5038 and 13-CB-5039 February 18, 1975 ORDER REMANDING PROCEEDING TO ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE BY MEMBERS JENKINS, KENNEDY, AND PENELLO On November 4, 1974, a hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge Lowell M. Goerlich, upon the complaint issued in the above-entitled proceed- ing. At the close of the hearing the Administrative Law Judge, over the objection of the Charging Parties, granted a motion by the Respondents to waive the preparation and issuance of a decision by him and to transfer the proceeding directly to the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, D.C., for decision. Thereafter, on November 27, 1974, the Board issued and served on the parties a Notice To Show Cause why it should not affirm the ruling of the Administrative Law Judge on the Respondents' motion and transfer this proceeding directly to the Board for decision. In response thereto, the Charging Parties and the General Counsel filed statements in opposition to the transfer of this proceeding to the Board, and the Respondents filed a statement in ' The title of "Trial Examiner" was changed to "Administrative Law Judge," effective August 19, 1972 support of the ruling of the Administrative Law Judge. 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. Having duly considered the matter, we conclude that under the statutory scheme of the Act the Administrative Law Judge was without the authority to grant the Respondents' motion, absent agreement of all the parties. Section 10(c) of the Act, the applicable provision, reads in pertinent part: In case the evidence is presented before a member of the Board, or before an examiner or examiners thereof, such member, or such examiner or examiners, as the case may be, shall issue and cause to be served on the parties to the proceed- ing a proposed report, together with a recom- mended order, which shall be filed with the Board .... [Emphasis supplied.]' The mandatory language of this section of the Act, therefore, clearly requires that an Administrative Law Judge issue a decision once evidence is presented before him. Accordingly, the Administra- tive Law Judge having failed to comply with the requirements of Section 10(c) of the Act, we shall remand this proceeding to him for the purposes of preparing and issuing a decision. It is hereby ordered that the above-entitled proceeding be, and it hereby is, remanded to Administrative Law Judge Lowell M. Goerlich for the purposes of preparing and issuing a decision containing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommended Order. Following service of said decision on the parties, the provisions of Section 102.46 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, shall be applicable. 216 NLRB No. 127