Jolly King Restaurant

280 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Seven Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restaurant and Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Bartenders International Union, AFL-CIO. Case 19-CA-8286 June 29, 1975 DECISION AND ORDER By MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, AND WALTHER Upon a charge filed on January 16, 1976, by Seat- tle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Bartenders Inter- national Union, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union, and duly served on Seven Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restaurant, herein called the Respondent, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 19, is- sued a complaint and notice of hearing on March 4, 1976, against Respondent, alleging that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge, complaint, and notice of hearing be- fore an Administrative Law Judge were duly served on the parties to this proceeding. With respect to the unfair labor practices, the com- plaint alleges in substance that on or about June 1, 1975, the Union was duly recognized as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of Respondent's employees in the unit found appropriate; that, com- mencing on or about August 21, 1975, Respondent, through an agent, agreed to sign a collective-bargain- ing agreement with the Union and that at all times since has failed and refused to execute the agree- ment; and that on or about September 10, 1975, the Union requested Respondent to furnish wage data on unit employees and Respondent has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the data requested, and at all times thereafter Respondent has refused, and continues to date to refuse, to bargain collec- tively with the Union as the exclusive bargaining rep- resentative, although the Union has requested and is requesting it to do so. Respondent failed to file an answer to the complaint. On April 6, 1976, counsel for the General Counsel filed directly with the Board a Motion for Summary Judgment. Subsequently, on April 16, 1976, 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 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 Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula- tions, Series 8, as amended, provides as follows: The respondent shall, within 10 days from the service of the complaint, file an answer thereto. The respondent shall specifically admit, deny, or explain each of the facts alleged in the com- plaint, unless the respondent is without knowl- edge, in which case the respondent shall so state, such statement operating as a denial. All allega- tions 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 ad- mitted 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 Re- spondent specifically states that unless an answer to the complaint is filed by Respondent within 10 days of service thereof "all of the allegations in the Com- plaint shall be deemed to be admitted by it to be true and may be so found by the Board." Further, ac- cording to the Motion for Summary Judgment, coun- sel for the General Counsel telephoned Respondent 4 days after the time for answering the complaint had expired, informing the Respondent of its default and the attendant consequences, and extending the time to answer to 10 days. On the following day Re- spondent's attorney advised counsel for the General Counsel that he no longer represented the Respon- dent in labor matters and furnished Respondent's home phone number. Calls to the phone number in- dicated that it had been disconnected. In view of Respondent's failure to file an answer, under the rule set forth above, and no good cause having been shown for such failure, the allegations of the complaint are deemed to be, and are found to be, true and we shall, accordingly, grant the Motion for Summary Judgment. On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes the following: 225 NLRB No. 41 JOLLY KING RESTAURANT 281 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT Respondent owns and operates a restaurant ad- joining a Royal Inn Hotel near the Seattle, Washing- ton, airport. During the past year Respondent and Royal Inn sold products and performed services val- ued in excess of $500,000. During the same period Respondent and Royal Inn purchased goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000, which were de- livered directly from States other than Washington. During this period Respondent and Royal Inn pur- chased goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 which were transported to said facilities from enterprises in the State of Washington, which enter- prises had received said goods and materials directly from States other than Washington. Respondent's restaurant is located on the premises of the Royal Inn with which it is connected by a covered walkway and with which it shares common entrances and ex- its. Meals and beverages served at Respondent's fa- cility, which includes a cocktail lounge denominated "The Lost Knight," may be charged to the guests' hotel bills at Royal Inn. Brochures and postcards at the hotel advertise the services available at Respondent's Jolly King restaurant and Lost Knight lounge. Respondent and Royal Inn are thus an inte- grated enterprise for jurisdictional purposes. We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Re- spondent is, and has been at all times material here- in, 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 juris- diction herein. Washington, excluding all office clerical em- ployees, confidential employees, and guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. The Union was recognized as the collective-bargain- ing representative of the employees in said unit on June 1, 1975, and the Union continues to be such exclusive representative within the meaning of Sec- tion 9(a) of the Act. B. The Request To Bargain and Respondent's Refusal Commencing on or about August 21, 1975, and at all times thereafter, the Union has requested the Re- spondent to bargain collectively with it as the exclu- sive collective-bargaining representative of all the employees in the above-described unit. Commencing on or about August 21, 1975, and continuing at all times thereafter to date, the Respondent has refused, and continues to refuse, to recognize and bargain with the Union as the exclusive representative for collective bargaining of all employees in said unit, by refusing to execute a collective-bargaining agreement with the Union to which it had previously agreed, and, since on or about September 10, 1975, Respon- dent has refused to furnish the Union data relating to wages of unit employees. Accordingly, we find that the Respondent has, since August 21, 1975, and at all times thereafter, refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of the employees in the ap- propriate unit, and that, by such refusal, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac- tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Bartenders In- ternational 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 1. The unit The following employees of the Respondent con- stitute a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining purposes within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All employees of Respondent at its facility lo- cated at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of Respondent, set forth in section III, above, occurring in connection with its opera- tions described in section I, above, have a close, inti- mate, and substantial relationship 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. 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, 282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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. Seven Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restau- rant is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Barten- ders International Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor orga- nization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. All employees of Respondent at its facility lo- cated at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, Washington, excluding all office clerical employees, confidential employees, and guards and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act. 4. Since on or about June 1, 1975, the above- named labor organization has been and now is the recognized and exclusive representative of all em- ployees in the aforesaid appropriate unit for the pur- pose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. 5. By refusing on or about August 21, 1975, and September 10, 1975, and at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively with the above-named labor or- ganization as the exclusive bargaining representative of all the employees of Respondent in the appropri- ate unit, by refusing to execute a previously agreed- upon contract, and by failing to furnish the Union wage data on unit employees, Respondent has en- gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) 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 to them in Section 7 of the Act, and thereby has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean- ing of Section 8(a)(1) 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. lations Board hereby orders that Respondent Seven Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restaurant, Seattle, Washington, its officers, agents, successors, and as- signs, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and con- ditions of employment by refusing to execute a con- tract previously agreed to, and by failing to furnish unit wage data to Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employ- ees and Bartenders International Union, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive bargaining representative of its em- ployees in the following appropriate unit: All employees of Respondent at its facility lo- cated at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, Washington, excluding all office clerical em- ployees, confidential employees, and guards and supervisors as defined 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, execute a previously agreed-to contract and furnish unit wage data requested to the above-named labor organization as the exclusive rep- resentative of all employees in the aforesaid appro- priate unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. (b) Post at its restaurant at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, Washington, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." I Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Re- gion 19, after being duly signed by Respondent's rep- resentative, shall be posted by Respondent immedi- ately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employ- ees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other materi- al. (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. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re- 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 Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board " JOLLY KING RESTAURANT 283 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 by refusing to execute a contract previously agreed to and by failing to furnish unit wage data to Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Bartenders International Union , AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of the employees in the bargain- ing 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 represen- tative of all employees in the bargaining unit de- scribed below, with respect to rates of pay, wag- es, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, and, if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. The bargaining unit is: All employees of Respondent at its facility located at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seat- tle, Washington, excluding all office clerical employees, confidential employees, and guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. SEVEN BROTHERS , LTD d/b/a JOLLY KING RESTAURANT