Bob's Big Boy Family Restaurants, a Division of Marriott Corporation

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Bob's Big Boy Family Restaurants, a Division of Marriott Corporation and Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers In- ternational Union of America, AFL-CIO Bob's Employees Association and Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers In- ternational Union of America, AFL-CIO. Cases 31-CA-10805 and 31-CB-4055 September 30, 1982 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND ZIMMERMAN Upon charges filed on January 28, 1981, as amended on March 3, 1981, and March 9, 1981, re- spectively, by Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers International Union of North America, AFL-CIO (the Union), and duly served on Bob's Big Boy Family Restaurants, a Division of Marriott Corporation (the Employer), and Bob's Employees Association (the Association), the Gen- eral Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 31, issued an order consolidating cases, a consolidated complaint and a notice of hearing on April 15, 1981, against Respondents. The consolidated com- plaint alleges that Respondent Employer had en- gaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(l), (2), (3), and (5) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and that Respondent Association had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. On February 2, 1982, the Regional Director for Region 31 issued an order postponing hearing. Copies of the order consolidating the cases, the consolidated complaint, the notice of hearing, and the order postponing hearing were duly served on the parties to this proceeding. On various dates in January and February 1982, the parties executed a stipulation of facts in which they agreed to certain facts, waived a hearing before an administrative law judge and the issuance of an administrative law judge's decision, and agreed to submit the case to the Board for finding of facts, conclusions of law, and an order based upon a record consisting of the charges, consoli- dated complaint, and the stipulation of facts, in- cluding exhibits attached thereto. By order dated May 19, 1982, the Board ap- proved the stipulation and transferred the proceed- ing to the Board and granted permission and time 264 NLRB No. 63 for the filing of briefs. Thereafter, the General Counsel filed a brief. 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. On the basis of the stipulation, the brief, and the entire record in this proceeding, the Board makes the following findings: 1. JURISDICTION Respondent Employer is a Delaware corporation engaged in the operation of a number of restaurant establishments in the United States, including food preparation facilities located at 830 and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California. Respondent Employ- er annually sells and ships goods valued in excess of $2,000 directly to customers located outside California. Respondent Employer, in the course and conduct of its business operations, annually de- rives gross revenue in excess of $500,000. The parties stipulated, and we find, that Re- spondent Employer is an employer within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the Act, engaged in and affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. We find that it will effectu- ate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The parties stipulated, and we find, that the Union and Respondent Association are labor orga- nizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 11. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. The Facts In or about 1954, a majority of the Employer's hourly restaurant, commissary, and delivery em- ployees at all of the Employer's California restau- rants, by a secret-ballot election conducted under the supervision of the Regional Director for Region 21 of the National Labor Relations Board, designated and selected the Association as their representative for purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer. Accordingly, in or about 1954, the Regional Director for Region 21 certified the Association as the exclusive bargaining representa- tive of the Employer's hourly restaurant, commis- sary, and delivery employees at all of the Employ- er's restaurants in California. Thereafter, the Em- ployer and the Association entered into a series of collective-bargaining agreements covering employ- ees in the statewide unit. 432 BOB'S BIG BOY FAMILY RESTAURANTS Subsequently, the Union, in Case 31-RC-3974, sought to represent a unit of all production and maintenance employees employed by the Employer at its facilities located at 830 and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act, hereinafter de- scribed as "the appropriate unit," or "commissary unit."' On April 28, 1978, the Board issued its De- cision on Review in Case 31-R'C-3974, in which it found that the contract between the Employer and the Association was not a bar to the petition filed by the Union because it contained a "members only" provision, and because the petition was filed in a timely fashion according to the contract's ef- fective date appearing on the cover page of the contract distributed to employees.2 On May 9, 1978, the impounded ballots from the election conducted on January 17, 1978, were opened and the tally revealed that a majority of employees voting in the election had voted for the Union. Accordingly, on May 17, 1978, the Region- al Director certified the Union as the exclusive bar- gaining representative in the appropriate unit. Commencing on or about May 31, 1978, and continuing to date, the Union has requested, and is requesting, the Employer to bargain collectively with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of em- ployment, and other terms and conditions of em- ployment, as the exclusive bargaining representa- tive of employees in the appropriate bargaining unit. Commencing on or about June 7, 1978, and at all material times thereafter, the Employer has re- fused, and continues to refuse, to recognize, meet, or bargain collectively with the Union. On Septem- ber 29, 1978, the Board, on the basis of an 8(a)(5) complaint and the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment, issued an Order compelling Respondent to recognize and bargain with the Union. Subsequent to the Board's Decision and Order in 238 NLRB 700, the Employer petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cir- cuit to set aside the Board's Order. The General Counsel cross-applied for enforcement of the same Order. On July 28, 1980, the court denied enforce- This unit is described as: All production and maintenance employees employed at Respondent Employer's facilities located at 830 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, Cali- fornia, excluding all other employees, truckdrivers, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. ' 235 NLRB 1227 (Member Jenkins concurring in part). The election in Case 31-RC-3974 was conducted on January 17, 1978, but the ballots were impounded pursuant to the Board's granting of the Employer's re- quest for review of the Regional Director's Decision and Direction of Election. s 238 NLRB 700. ment of the bargaining order and remanded the case to the Board for further consideration. 4 The Board accepted the court's remand, and, on No- vember 3, 1981, issued its Supplemental Decision and Order in which it affirmed its earlier Order re- quiring Respondent to bargain with the Union. 5 In its Supplemental Decision, the Board reaffirmed its finding that the Union's petition was timely filed and that the contract between the Employer and the Association did not bar the Union's petition.6 In or about September 1980 or October 1980, au- thorized agents of the Employer at its facility in Glendale, California, dealt directly with employees in the appropriate unit by requesting that these em- ployees complete "attitude" surveys on how to im- prove working conditions. In early October 1980, the Employer increased health and life insurance benefits for employees in the commissary unit. Also in early October 1980, the Employer granted a wage increase to unit employees. On or about De- cember 22, 1980, the Employer and the Association entered into a collective-bargaining agreement cov- ering, inter alia, commissary employees. Since on or about January I, 1981, the Employer and the Association have maintained and enforced said agreement, which covers the wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment of com- missary employees. As a result of the Employer's adherence to the provisions of this agreement with the Association, the Employer changed the terms and conditions of employment for employees in the appropriate unit. With respect to the acts and con- duct described hereinabove, the Employer did not afford the Union prior notice or an opportunity to negotiate and bargain as the exclusive representa- tive of commissary employees. Further, at all mate- rial times herein, the Employer has recognized the Association as the exclusive bargaining representa- tive of said unit employees. The most recent collec- tive-bargaining agreement between the Employer and the Association contains a union-security pro- vision. 7 4 625 F.2d 850 s 259 NLRB 153 (Member Jenkins dissenting) 6 However, the Board agreed with the court, as the law of the case, that the contract did not contain an illegal members-only provision which would have also voided the bar quality of the contract. 259 NLRB 153. 155. The Board has filed with the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit an "Application Upon Remand for Enforcement of an Order, as Reaf- firmed," of the National Labor Relations Board. As of this date the court has not ruled on that application. Also currently pending before the Board on exceptions is an administrative law judge's decision in Case 31- CA-9259, in which it is alleged that the Employer violated the Act by, inter alia, contracting out part of its operations without bargaining with the Union. 7 The union-security provision provides in pertinent part as follows: Continued 433 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD B. Analysis and Conclusions We agree with the General Counsel that the above-stipulated facts demonstrate that the Em- ployer and the Association violated the Act as con- tended in the consolidated complaint. The Employ- er has steadfastly refused to recognize or bargain with the Union as ordered by the Board in its pre- vious decisions involving these parties.8 It is well settled that collateral litigation does not suspend the duty to bargain under Section 8(a)(5).9 The Employer's refusal to bargain originally stemmed from its technical refusal to bargain in order to challenge the Board's finding that there was no contract bar to the Union's petiton. There is no merit to the argument that a party's duties under the Act are suspended or relieved because litigation is pending before the court of appeals, or before the Board on remand from such a court. Further- more, neither the Employer nor the Association has offered any newly discovered or previously un- available evidence in support of a ruling different from that of the Board in the prior proceedings. We find, therefore, that Respondent's continuing refusal to recognize and to bargain with the Union violates Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. Also, the Employer has stipulated that it dealt directly with employees by requesting that they complete attitude surveys regarding how to improve work- ing conditions. Respondent neither notified nor bargained with the Union about the conduct of the surveys, whose subject matter, as noted, concerned working conditions. We agree with the General Counsel that such direct dealing constituted indi- vidual bargaining in derogation of the Employer's bargaining obligation to the Union, and thereby violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.l° It is axiomatic that an employer violates the Act by unilaterally making material changes in terms and conditions of employment without notifying a certified representative of the changes and afford- ing it an opportunity to bargain about them. Here, the Employer stipulated that it unilaterally in- creased health and life insurance benefits and 11 Union Membership All new employees are covered by this Agreement from the time of hire and all employees must, as a condition of employment, ac- quire membership in the Association within sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Agreement or date of employment, whichever is later, and maintain such membership for the duration of this Agreement, Maintenance of membership requires the prompt tender of periodic dues and the initiation fees uniformly required by the As- sociation as a condition of acquiring or retaining membership therein. a 238 NLRB 700; 259 NLRB 153. 9 Montgomery Ward A Co., Incorporated, 228 NLRB 1330, 1331 (1977), and cases cited therein at fn. 8. 'o St. Joseph's Hospital of the Franciscan Sisters of Milwaukee, Inc. 247 NLRB 869, 877 (1980). wages for unit employees. The contract it signed with the Association also altered terms and condi- tions of employment on a unilateral basis. All of this conduct was done by the Employer without prior notice to the Union or without affording the Union an opportunity to bargain over the changes. By such conduct, we find that the Employer vio- lated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. We also agree with the General Counsel that the Employer undermined the status of the Union as the certified bargaining representative of the com- missary employees by rendering unlawful assistance to the Association. By continuing to recognize the Association as the representative of such employees despite the Board's certification of the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of those em- ployees, we find that the Employer violated Sec- tion 8(a)(2) and (1) of the Act. Similarly, we con- clude that the Employer violated the same section of the Act by entering into a collective-bargaining agreement from 1980 to 1983 with the Association, which had lost the election conducted by the Board. By entering into a contract with the Associ- ation which contained a union-security provision, and by enforcing that union-security provision, the Employer violated Section 8(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the Act. Finally, we find merit in the General Counsel's contention that the Association violated the Act. By entering into the 1980-83 contract containing a union-security provision, the Association violated Section 8(b)(2) of the Act. Such conduct also con- stitutes an independent violation of Section 8(b)(1)(A), since the Association was not the exclu- sive bargaining representative of employees. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of the Employer and the Associ- ation set forth above have a close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and com- merce among the several States and tend to lead to industrial strife burdening and obstructing the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY Having found that the Employer has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices in viola- tion of Section 8(a)(1), (2), (3), and (5) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom, and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the purposes of the Act. Having found that the Association has engaged in, and is engaging in, unfair labor practices in vio- lation of Section 8(b)(l)(A) and (2) of the Act, we shall order it to cease and desist therefrom, and to 434 BOB'S BIG BOY FAMILY RESTAURANTS take certain affirmative action designed to effectu- ate the purposes of the Act. Having found that the Employer and the Associ- ation unlawfully entered into a collective-bargain- ing agreement containing a union-security provi- sion which was, and is being, enforced, we shall order that the Employer and the Association, joint- ly and severally, reimburse the Employees for dues, fees, and other money unlawfully exacted from them, with interest thereon to be computed in the manner prescribed in Florida Steel Corporation, 231 NLRB 651 (1977). (See, generally, Isis Plumb- ing & Healing Co., 138 NLRB 716 (1962)). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Bob's Big Boy Family Restaurants, a Division of Marriott Corporation, is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & To- bacco Workers International Union of America, AFL-CIO, and Bob's Employees Association are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. By refusing to bargain collectively concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees in the appropriate unit described below, the Em- ployer violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. The appropriate unit is: All production and maintenance employees employed at the Employer's facilities located at 830 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, excluding all other employees, truckdrivers, office clerical employees, professional employ- ees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. 4. By failing to bargain with the Union, and deal- ing directly with employees by requesting employ- ees to complete attitude surveys on how to im- prove working conditions, the Employer violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. 5. By unilaterally changing terms and conditions of employment by increasing health and life insur- ance benefits for unit employees, by granting a wage increase, and changing other terms and con- ditions of employment, without notifying the Union of the changes and affording the Union an opportunity to bargain with respect to such changes, the Employer violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. 6. By entering into and applying a collective-bar- gaining agreement, which contained a union-secu- rity provision, with the Association, and by recog- nizing the Association as the representative of its unit employees, the Employer has violated Section 8(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the Act. 7. By entering into and effectuating a collective- bargaining agreement, containing a union-security provision, with the Employer, the Association vio- lated Section 8(b)(2) and (I)(A) of the Act. 8. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re- lations Board hereby orders that: A. Respondent Bob's Big Boy Family Restau- rants, a Division of Marriott Corporation, Glen- dale, California, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers Inter- national Union of America, AFL-CIO, as the ex- clusive bargaining representative of its employees in the following appropriate unit: All production and maintenance employees employed at the Employer's facilities located at 830 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, excluding all other employees, truckdrivers, office clerical employees, professional employ- ees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. (b) Failing to bargain with the above-named Union by dealing directly with employees in above-described unit by requesting employees to complete attitude surveys on how to improve working conditions. (c) Unilaterally changing terms and conditions of employment by increasing health and life insurance benefits, by granting a wage increase, and by changing other terms and conditions of employ- ment of employees in the above-mentioned unit without notifying the Union of such changes or af- fording the Union an opportunity to bargain with respect to such changes. (d) Recognizing Bob's Employees Association as the representative of employees in the above-de- scribed unit. (e) Entering into and applying a 1980-83 collec- tive-bargaining agreement, which contains a union- security provision, with Bob's Employees Associ- ation, provided, however, that nothing herein shall 435 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD require the Employer to vary or abandon any wages, hours, or other substantive features of its re- lations with its employees in the appropriate unit, unless so requested by Local No. 37. (f) Deducting money from the wages of employ- ees in the appropriate unit and remitting the same to Bob's Employees Association as initiation fees, dues, or for other purposes. (g) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex- ercise of rights guaranteed them under Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which will effectuate the purpose of the Act: (a) Withdraw and withhold recognition from Bob's Employees Association as the representative of employees in the appropriate unit. (b) Upon request, bargain with Local No. 37 as the exclusive representative of all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment and, if an understanding is reached, embody such an understanding in a signed agree- ment. (c) Jointly and severally with Bob's Employees Association, reimburse employees in the above-de- scribed unit for any initiation fees, dues, or other moneys paid pursuant to the aforesaid 1980-83 agreement, plus interest thereon computed in the manner set forth in the section of this Decision en- titled "The Remedy." (d) Preserve and, upon request, make available to the Board and its agents, for examination and copy- ing, all payroll records and reports, and all other records required to assertain the amount of any re- imbursement due under the terms of this Decision and Order. (e) Post at its facilities at 830 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix A."" Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 31, after being duly signed by Respondent's representative, shall be posted by Respondent im- mediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in con- spicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to ensure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. I" 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 Pursu- ant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board." (f) Notify the Regional Director for Region 31, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps have been taken to comply here- with. B. Respondent Bob's Employees Association, Glendale, California, its officers, agents, and repre- sentatives, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Acting as the representative of employees in the above-described unit. (b) Entering into and effectuating the 1980-83 collective-bargaining contract, containing a union- security provision, with the Employer. (c) Accepting and retaining money deducted for initiation fees, dues, and other purposes under the above-mentioned contract. (d) In any like or related manner restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of rights guar- anteed them under Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Jointly and severally with the Employer re- imburse employees in the above-described unit for any initiation fees, dues, or other moneys deducted pursuant to the 1980-83 contract applied to said employees, with interest thereon, computed in the manner set forth in the section of this Decison enti- tled "The Remedy." (b) Preserve and, upon request, make available to the Board or its agents, for examination and copy- ing, all financial records and reports and all other documents necessary and relevant to analyze and compute the amounts in reimbursements due under this Order. (c) Post in conspicuous places in the Respondent Union's business office, meeting halls, and places where notices to its members are customarily posted, copies of the attached notice marked "Ap- pendix B."12 Copies of said notice, on forms pro- vided by the Regional Director for Region 31, after being duly signed by an authorized repre- sentative of the Respondent Union, shall be posted immediately upon receipt thereof, and be main- tained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent Union to ensure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (d) Furnish to the Regional Director for Region 31 signed copies of the aforesaid notice for posting by Respondent Employer at its Glendale, Califor- nia, location, in places where notices to employees are customarily posted, if it be willing. Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Direc- tor, after being signed by the Respondent Union. as 1 See fn. 11, supra. 436 BOB'S BIG BOY FAMILY RESTAURANTS indicated, shall be forthwith returned to the Re- gional Director for disposition by him. (e) Notify the Regional Director for Region 31, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps have been taken to comply here- with. MEMBER JENKINS, dissenting: For reasons expressed in my dissent in the prior case proceeding reported at 259 NLRB 153 (1981), I would dimiss the complaint. APPENDIX A 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 with Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers International Union of North America, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of the employees in the bargain- ing unit described below. WE WILL NOT fail to bargain with the above-named Union by dealing directly with employees in the unit described below by re- questing employees to complete attitude sur- veys on how to improve working conditions. WE WILL NOT unilaterally change terms and conditions of employment by increasing health and life insurance benefits, by granting a wage increase to employees, and by changing other terms and conditions of employment, without notifying the above-named Union of the changes and affording that Union an opportu- nity to bargain with respect to such changes. WE WILL NOT recognize Bob's Employees Association as the representative of employees in the unit described below. WE WILL NOT enter into and apply a 1980- 83 collective-bargaining agreement, which contains a union-security provision, with Bob's Employees Association, provided, however, that nothing herein shall require us to vary or abandon any wages, hours, or other substan- tive features of our relations with our employ- ees in the unit described below, unless so re- quested by Local No. 37, Bakery, Confection- ery & Tobacco Workers International Union of America, AFL-CIO. WE WILL NOT deduct money from the wages of employees in the unit described below or remit the same to Bob's Employees Association, as initiation fees, dues, or for other purposes. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employ- ees in the exercise of rights guaranteed them under Section 7 of the Act. WE WILL withdraw and withhold recogni- tion from Bob's Employees Association as the representative of employees in the unit de- scribed below. WE WILL, upon request, bargain with Local No. 37, Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers International Union of North Amer- ica, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of all employees in the bargaining unit de- scribed below, with respect to rates of pay, wages, 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 production and maintenance employ- ees employed at our facilities located at 830 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California. excluding all other employees, truckdrivers, office clerical employees, professional em- ployees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. WE WILL, jointly and severally, with Bob's Employees Association, reimburse employees in the unit described above, for any initiation fees, dues, or other money paid pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, with interest. BOB'S BIG BOY FAMILY RESTAU- RANTS, A DIVISION OF MARRIOTT CORPORATION APPENDIX B NOTICE To MEMBERS POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR REL ATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT act as the representative of employees in the below-mentioned unit: All production and maintenance employees employed at Bob's Big Boy Family Restau- rants, a Division of Marriott Corporation, located at 830 Sonora Avenue, Glendale, California, and 611 Sonora Avenue, Glen- dale, California, excluding all other employ- ees, truckdrivers, office clerical employees, 437 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD professional employees, guards and supervi- sors as defined in the Act. WE WIIl. NOI enter into and effectuate the 1980-83 collective-bargaining agreement, con- taining a union-security provision, with Bob's Big Boy Family Restaurant, a Division of Marriott Corporation. WE WItL. Nor accept and retain money de- ducted for initiation fees, dues, and other pur- poses under the above-mentioned contract. WE WIl.L NOT in any like or related manner restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. WE WILL, jointly and severally, with Bob's Big Boy Family Restaurants, a Division of Marriott Corporation, reimburse employees in the above-described unit, for any initiation fees, dues, or other money deducted pursuant to the 1980-83 collective-bargaining agreement applied to employees, with interest. BOB'S EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION S 438