Kenneth Curry Co. Inc.

134 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Kenneth Curry Company, Inc. and James M. Coupe, Jr. Case 17-CA-11157 19 September 1984 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS ZIMMERMAN, HUNTER, AND DENNIS On 30 June 1983 the National Labor Relations Board issued its Order' in this proceeding in which it adopted, in the absence of exceptions, the admin- istrative law judge's decision. The Order directed that the Respondent, Kenneth Curry Company, Inc., its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, make whole James M. Coupe Jr. for any loss of earnings he may have suffered as a result of the Respondent's unfair labor practices. Thereafter, on 5 December 1983 the United States Court of Ap- peals for the Eighth Circuit entered its judgment enforcing in full the Board's Order. 2 A controver- sy 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 17 on 23 April 1984 issued a backpay specification and notice of hearing alleging the amount of backpay due to James M. Coupe Jr. under the Board's Order and notifying the Respondent that a timely answer must be filed which must comply with the Board's Rules and Regulations. The Respondent failed to file an answer to the backpay specifica- tion. On 20 June 1984 the General Counsel filed with the Board a "Motion to Transfer Proceedings to the Board and for Summary Judgment." On 27 June 1984 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 Respondent has filed no response. Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment Section 102.54 of the Board's Rules and Regula- tions provides that if an answer is not filed within 15 days from the service of the specification the Board may find the allegations of the specification to be true and enter such an order as may be ap- propriate. The undisputed allegations in the Motion for Summary Judgment disclose that the Respond- ent, after being duly served, 3 has failed to file an answer to the backpay specification. 1 Not reported in Board volumes 2 NLRB v Kenneth Curry Co, No. 83-2426 (unpublished opinion) 3 On 23 April 1984 the Regional Office mailed the backpay specifica- tion and notice of heanng to the Respondent by certified mail to two ad- In view of the Respondent's failure to file an answer to the backpay specification in accordance with the provisions of Section 102.54 of the Na- tional Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula- tions and the Respondent's failure to respond to the Notice to Show Cause, 4 the Board finds the allega- tions of the specification to be true and grants the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment. Therefore, on the basis of the allegations which are accepted as true the Board finds the facts as set forth therein, concludes the backpay due James M. Coupe Jr. and the contributions due the pension, health, welfare, and industry advancement funds3 on Coupe's behalf are as stated in the computations of the specification and orders that payment there- of be made by Respondent Kenneth Curry Compa- ny, Inc. as set forth in the backpay specification. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Respondent, Kenneth Curry Company, Inc., Kansas City, Missiouri, its officers, agents, succes- sors, and assigns, shall pay to employee James M. Coupe Jr. amounts due him in accordance with the backpay specification plus interest accrued to the date of payment pursuant to the Board's Order and the court judgment, minus tax withholdings re- quired by Federal and state laws, and amounts due for contributions to the pension, health, welfare, and industry advancement funds as stated in the backpay specification. dresses which had been provided to the Regional Office by the Respond- ent 9440 Newton, Kansas City, MO and 9804 Hedges, Kansas City, MO The documents mailed to the 9440 Newton address were returned on 4 May 1984 to the Regional Office by the Postal Service as "unclaimed" by the Respondent The documents mailed to the 9804 Hedges address were forwarded by the Postal Service to the 9440 Newton address pursu- ant to a change of address form completed by the Respondent and filed with the post office On 18 May 1984 the Regional Office again mailed the documents to both addresses by regular mail with a cover letter In- forming the Respondent of its obligation to file an answer no later than 4 June 1984 On 18 and 19 May 1984 counsel for the General Counsel at- tempted to serve the Respondent personally at both addresses, but the Respondent was not present On 25 May 1984 the compliance officer for Region 17 visited the Respondent's premises at 9440 Newton and left the backpay specification and notice of hearing with a cover letter again noti- fying the Respondent of the 4 June 1984 deadline for filing an answer 4 The order transferring proceedings to the Board and Notice to Show Cause were mailed to the Respondent by certified mall to the 9804 Hedges address and by regular mail to the 9440 Newton address On 30 June 1984 the certified mail envelope was received and accepted at the 9804 Hedges address 5 Member Hunter would not order the Respondent to make contribu- tions to the industry advancement fund 272 NLRB No. 8