Sears, Roebuck & Co.

1 325 NLRB No. 72 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. Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Local 243, Inter- national Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL–CIO. Case 7–CA–40189 March 23, 1998 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN GOULD AND MEMBERS FOX AND BRAME Upon a charge filed by the Union on September 8, 1997, the General Counsel of the National Labor Rela- tions Board issued a complaint on November 28, 1997, against Sears, Roebuck and Co., the Respondent, alleg- ing that it has violated Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act. Although properly served copies of the charge and complaint, the Re- spondent failed to file an answer. On February 17, 1998, the General Counsel filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with the Board. On February 19, 1998, the Board issued an order transfer- ring 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 are therefore undisputed. The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment Sections 102.20 and 102.21 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations provide that the allegations in the complaint shall be deemed admitted if an answer is not filed within 14 days from service of the complaint, un- less good cause is shown. In addition, the complaint affirmatively notes that unless an answer is filed within 14 days of service, all the allegations in the complaint will be considered admitted. Further, the undisputed al- legations in the Motion for Summary Judgment dis- close that the Region, by letter dated December 17, 1997, notified the Respondent that unless an answer were received by December 31, 1997, a Motion for Summary Judgment would be filed. In the absence of good cause being shown for the failure to file a timely answer, we grant the General Counsel’s Motion for Summary Judgment. On the entire record, the Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT I. JURISDICTION At all material times, the Respondent, a corporation with offices in several States and offices within the State of Michigan, including an office and place of business at 34650 Mound Road, Sterling Heights, Michigan, has been engaged in the retail sale of home appliances and other goods. During the calendar year ending December 31, 1996, the Respondent, in con- ducting its business operations, derived gross revenues valued in excess of $500,000 and purchased goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 which it caused to be transported to its stores in the State of Michigan directly from points located outside the State of Michi- gan. We find that the Respondent is an employer en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act and that the Union is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES The following employees constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All full-time and regular part-time Leadpersons, Technicians, Truck Mechanics, Servicepersons, Shuttle Truck Drivers, Router Specialists, Service Trainees, Parts Specialists, Fork Lift Drivers and Clerk Specialists employed by the Respondent at its Sterling Heights, Michigan facility; but exclud- ing guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. At all material times, the Union has been the des- ignated exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit and has been recognized as such representa- tive by the Respondent. Such recognition has been set forth in successive collective-bargaining agreements, the most recent of which is effective by its terms for the period from October 19, 1996, through October 19, 1999. At all material times, based on Section 9(a) of the Act, the Union has been the exclusive collective- bargaining representative of the unit. About June 26, July 27, and August 14, 1997, the Union, by letters, requested the Respondent to provide information needed to process and/or investigate a grievance regarding the Respondent’s intention to sub- contract work performed by the unit. This information is necessary for and relevant to the performance of the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining represent- ative of the unit employees. Since about June 30, 1997, the Respondent has refused and/or failed to pro- vide this information to the Union. CONCLUSION OF LAW By the acts and conduct described above, the Re- spondent has been failing and refusing to bargain col- lectively and in good faith with the exclusive collec- tive-bargaining representative of its unit employees, and has thereby engaged in unfair labor practices af- 2 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 1 If 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.’’ fecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) and (5) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. REMEDY Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to cease and desist and to take certain affirmative action de- signed to effectuate the policies of the Act. Specifi- cally, having found that the Respondent has failed to provide the Union information that is relevant and nec- essary to its role as the exclusive bargaining represent- ative of the unit employees, we shall order the Re- spondent to furnish the Union the information re- quested. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Respondent, Sears, Roebuck and Co., Sterling Heights, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall 1. Cease and desist from (a) Failing to provide requested information that is necessary for and relevant to the performance of the Union’s role as the exclusive collective-bargaining rep- resentative of the following unit employees: All full-time and regular part-time Leadpersons, Technicians, Truck Mechanics, Servicepersons, Shuttle Truck Drivers, Router Specialists, Service Trainees, Parts Specialists, Fork Lift Drivers and Clerk Specialists employed by the Respondent at its Sterling Heights, Michigan facility; but exclud- ing 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 by Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to effectuate the policies of the Act. (a) Furnish Local 243, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL–CIO, in a timely manner, the informa- tion it requested about June 26, July 27, and August 14, 1997. (b) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at its facility in Sterling Heights, Michigan, copies of the attached notice marked ‘‘Appendix.’’1 Copies of the notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 7, after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized representative, shall be posted by the Re- spondent and maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure that the no- tices are not altered, defaced or covered by any other material. In the event that, during the pendency of these proceedings, the Respondent has gone out of business or closed the facility involved in these pro- ceedings, the Respondent shall duplicate and mail, at its own expense, a copy of the notice to all current employees and former employees employed by the Re- spondent at any time since June 30, 1997. (c) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file with the Regional Director a sworn certification of a responsible official on a form provided by the Region attesting to the steps that the Respondent has taken to comply. Dated, Washington, D.C. March 23, 1998 llllllllllllllllll William B. Gould IV, Chairman llllllllllllllllll Sarah M. Fox, Member llllllllllllllllll J. Robert Brame III, Member (SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government The National Labor Relations Board has found that we violated the National Labor Relations Act and has or- dered us to post and abide by this notice. WE WILL NOT fail to provide requested information that is necessary for and relevant to the performance of the Union’s role as the exclusive collective-bargain- ing representative of the following unit employees: All full-time and regular part-time Leadpersons, Technicians, Truck Mechanics, Servicepersons, Shuttle Truck Drivers, Router Specialists, Service Trainees, Parts Specialists, Fork Lift Drivers and Clerk Specialists employed by us at our Sterling Heights, Michigan facility; but excluding guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act. 3 SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO. WE WILL, in a timely fashion, furnish Local 243, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL–CIO, the information it requested about June 26, July 27, and August 14, 1997. SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO.