Osborn Electric, Inc.

1 325 NLRB No. 176 1 On December 17, 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued its Decision and Order in Case 97–6341 en- forcing the Board’s Order. 2 See New Horizons for the Retarded, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987). 3 See Merryweather Optical Co., 240 NLRB 1213 (1979). NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Board volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. 20570, of any typographical or other formal er- rors so that corrections can be included in the bound volumes. Osborn Electric, Inc. and Local Union #131, Inter- national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL–CIO and Roger Clark, Party of Interest. Case 7–CA–37273 June 30, 1998 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS LIEBMAN, HURTGEN, AND BRAME On October 15, 1996, the National Labor Relations Board issued a Decision and Order,1 inter alia, order- ing Osborn Electric, Inc., to make whole certain of its employees for loss of earnings and other benefits re- sulting from the Respondent’s unfair labor practices in violation of the National Labor Relations Act. A controversy having arisen over the amount of backpay due, on April 14, 1998, the Regional Director for Region 7 issued a compliance specification and no- tice of hearing alleging the amount due under the Board’s Order, and notifying the Respondent that it should file a timely answer complying with the Board’s Rules and Regulations. Although properly served with a copy of the compliance specification, the Respondent failed to file an answer. On May 18, 1998, the Regional Office received a letter from the Respondent asserting that it would not file an answer to the compliance specification inas- much as the Respondent is currently in bankruptcy proceedings. On June 1, 1998, the Acting General Counsel filed with the Board a Motion to Transfer Case to the Board and for Summary Judgment, with exhibits attached. On June 2, 1998, the Board issued an order transferring the proceeding to the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why the motion should not be granted. The Re- spondent filed no response. The allegations in the mo- tion and in the compliance specification are therefore undisputed. The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment Section 102.56(a) of the Board’s Rules and Regula- tions provides that the Respondent shall file an answer within 21 days from service of a compliance specifica- tion. Section 102.56(c) of the Board’s Rules and Regu- lations states: If the respondent fails to file any answer 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 further notice to the respondent, find the specification to be true and enter such order as may be appropriate. Although the Respondent is in bankruptcy, it is well established that the institution of bankruptcy proceed- ings does not deprive the Board of jurisdiction or au- thority to entertain and process an unfair labor practice case to its final disposition. Phoenix Co., 274 NLRB 995 (1985). Board proceedings fall within the excep- tion to the automatic stay provisions for proceedings by a governmental unit to enforce its police or regu- latory powers. See id., and cases cited therein. According to the uncontroverted allegations of the Motion for Summary Judgment, the Respondent, de- spite having been advised of the filing requirements, has failed to file an answer to the compliance speci- fication. In the absence of good cause for the Respond- ent’s failure to file an answer, we deem the allegations in the compliance specification to be admitted as true, and grant the General Counsel’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Accordingly, we conclude that the net amounts due the employees and the Charging Party Union’s fringe benefit funds is as stated in the compli- ance specification, and we will order payment by the Respondent of those amounts, plus interest accrued on those amounts to the date of payment. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Respondent, Osborn Electric, Inc., Portage, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall make whole the individuals and entities named below, by paying them the amounts following their names, plus interest on the backpay due the employees2 and any additional amounts due the funds,3 and minus tax with- 2 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 4 Local Union No. 131, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL–CIO Health Plan fund. 5 Local Union No. 131, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL–CIO Pension Plan. 6 Local Union No. 131, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL–CIO National Electrical Benefit Fund. 7 Local Union No. 131, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL–CIO Kalamazoo Labor-Management Cooperative Fund. 8 Local Union No. 131, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL–CIO Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust Fund. 9 The compliance specification erroneously stated that the sum owed the fringe benefit funds is $110,765.26 rather than $110,754.26. holdings on the backpay due the employees required by Federal and state laws: Baker, Pat $71.76 Campbell, Andy 1,331.80 Casanto, Todd 127.29 Clark, Roger 1,942.66 Koutny, Ken 3,361.42 Oberthaler, Kevin 3,087.82 Spreitzer, Joe 129.68 Timmerman, Steve 2,339.01 Total Backpay Due Employees $12,391.44 Health Plan4 $67,530.54 Local Pension5 30,071.63 NEBF6 12,245.36 LMCF7 691.21 JATC8 215.52 Total Due the Funds: $110,754.269 Grand Total Due: $123,145.70 Dated, Washington, D.C. June 30, 1998 llllllllllllllllll Wilma B. Liebman, Member llllllllllllllllll Peter J. Hurtgen, Member llllllllllllllllll J. Robert Brame III, Member (SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD