Pennsylvania Electric Co.

358 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Pennsylvania Electric Company and Violet L Shu- gerts Case 6-CA-17557 March 20, 1989 ORDER GRANTING MOTION By CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS CRACRAFT AND HIGGINS On July 27, 1988, the Board issued its Decision and Order in this proceeding' in which it found that Respondent Pennsylvania Electric Company violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by discriminatorily failing and refusing to retain or rehire certain named periodic temporary employees because of union and concerted activities On August 24, 1988, the General Counsel filed a motion for reconsider- ation requesting the Board remand the case to the judge "for the purpose of taking additional evi dence in the unfair labor practice proceeding as to the allegations in the Complaint of discriminatory conduct by Respondent subsequent to the Unit No 3 and Unit No 1 outages in 1984 " The Respond- ent filed a response opposing the General Counsel's motion The National Labor Relations Board has delegat- ed its authority in this proceeding to a three member panel At the underlying hearing, the General Counsel moved to amend the complaint to allege further acts of discrimination subsequent to the Unit No 3 and Unit No 1 outages in 1984 with the under standing that questions concerning the allegations would be left to the compliance stage" At that time, the Respondent did not oppose the General Counsel's motion and the motion was granted by the judge In the Board's previous decision, the Board stated 1 289 NLRB 1200 (1988) No agreement by the parties to litigate alleged discrimination in future outages permits the litigation of unfair labor practice allega- tions in compliance proceedings 289 NLRB 1200 at fn 3 2 In so finding, the Board did not discuss the fact that the judge had granted a motion to amend the complaint, nor did it dismiss the amended complaint insofar as it alleged viola- tions not specifically found in the Board's decision Because the complaint, as amended at the hear ing, contains outstanding unfair labor practice alle gations that have not been actually litigated by the parties or decided by the judge or the Board, we shall grant the General Counsel's motion and remand the proceeding to the administrative law judge to reopen the record for the taking of addi tional evidence regarding the remaining complaint allegations, concerning further acts of discrimina tion subsequent to the Unit No 3 and Unit No 1 outages in 1984, and for the preparation of a sup- plemental decision by the judge Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the General Counsel's motion for reconsideration is granted and this matter is remanded to Administrative Law Judge Marvin Roth to reopen the unfair labor practice proceeding for the submission of evidence on alle- gations of discriminatory hiring in outages subse- quent to those previously litigated On the conclu sion of the reopened hearing, Administrative Law Judge Roth shall prepare and serve on the parties a supplemental decision containing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations Follow- ing service of the supplemental decision on the par- ties, the provisions of Section 102 46 of the Board's Rules and Regulations shall govern 2 In her motion the General Counsel does not ask the Board to recon seder its ruling that litigation of the alleged subsequent unfair labor prac tices cannot properly be left to the compliance stage 293 NLRB No 36