Mackinac Jacks

MACKINAC JACKS 309 Mari-Weather, Inc. d/b/a Mackinac Jacks andKathe- rive King. Case 7-CA-10088 December 5, 1974 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING AND PENELLO On August 29, 1973, the National Labor Relations Board issued an Order adopting, in the absence of ex- ceptions, the Decision of an Administrative Law Judge directing the Respondent, inter alia, to offer immediate and full reinstatement to their former or substantially equivalent positions and to make whole Katherine King, Donna Jacobson, Deborah Owens, and Lonnie Odom, Jr., for any loss of earnings resulting from Re- spondent's discrimination against them. On January 15, 1974, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit entered its order enforcing in full the backpay provisions of the Board's Order. A contro- versy having arisen over the amount of backpay due under the terms of the Board's Order, as enforced by the court, the Regional Director for Region 7, on July 3, 1974, issued a backpay specification and notice of hearing alleging the amounts of backpay due under the terms of the Board's Order. Respondent failed to file an answer to the specification. On August 29, 1974, the General Counsel filed di- rectly with the Board in Washington, D.C., a Motion for Summary Judgment. The Board, on September 6, 1974, issued an order transferring proceeding to the Board and Notice To Show Cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment should not be granted. Respondent failed to file 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: 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 notice to the respondent, find the specification to be true and enter such order as may be appropriate... . The backpay specification, issued and served on the Respondent on July 3, 1974, and again on July 23, 1974, explicitly states that the Respondent shall, within 15 days from the date of the specification, file an an- swer to the specification with the Regional Director for Region 7 and that, if the answer fails to deny the allega- tions of the specification in the manner required under the Board's Rules and Regulations and the failure to do so is not adequately explained, such allegations shall be deemed to be admitted to be true and the Respondent shall be precluded from introducing any evidence con- troverting them. According to the Motion for Summary Judgment, the corporate agent and treasurer of Respondent refused service of the backpay specification and notice of hearing on or about July 8, 1974. On July 23, 1974, the Regional Director for Region 7 served on the Re- spondent, by registered and regular mail, pursuant to Michigan statutes providing for substituted service, a second copy of the backpay specification and notice of hearing. As of the date of the Motion for Summary Judgment, Respondent had not filed an answer to the specification nor had it requested an extension of time to file. Respondent also failed to ' file a response to the Notice to Show Cause. The allegations of the Motion for Summary Judgment are, therefore, uncontroverted. Since Respondent has not filed an answer to the specifi- cation, in accordance with the rules set forth above, are deemed to be admitted and are so found-by the Board. Accordingly, on the basis of the allegations of the specification which are accepted as true, the Board finds the facts as set forth therein, concludes that the net backpay due each discriminatee is as stated in the computations of the specification, and hereinafter or- ders the payment thereof by the Respondent to each discriminatee. Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment Section 102.54 of the Board's Rules and Regulations provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (a) . . . The respondent shall, within 15 days from the service of the specification, if any, file an answer thereto... * (c) . . . If the respondent fails to file any answer ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Re- lations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Respondent, Mari-Weather, Inc., d/b/a Mackinac Jacks, Ann Arbor, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall make whole each of the discriminatees named below by pay- ing them the amounts set forth adjacent to their names plus interest accrued at the rate of 6 percent per annum 215 NLRB No. 48 310 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD to be computed in the manner prescribed in Isis Plumb- Donna Jacobson $451.87 ing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962), until all Deborah Owens $2,323.16 backpay due is paid, less the tax withholdings required Katherine King $2,183.52 by Federal, state, and municipal laws. Lonnie Odom, Jr. $1,588.34