Guardsmark, LLC

351 NLRB No. 2 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex- ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. 20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can be included in the bound volumes. Guardsmark, LLC and Local I-35, Dearborn Indus- trial Fire Fighters Association, International As- sociation of Fire Fighters, AFL–CIO. Case 7– CA–50296 September 21, 2007 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN BATTISTA AND MEMBERS LIEBMAN AND WALSH The General Counsel seeks a default judgment in this case on the ground that the Respondent has failed to file an answer to the complaint. Upon a charge filed by the Union on April 19, 2007, the General Counsel issued the complaint on June 29, 2007, against Guardsmark, LLC, the Respondent, alleging that it has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. The Respondent failed to file an answer. On August 7, 2007, the General Counsel filed a Mo- tion for Default Judgment with the Board. Thereafter, on August 13, 2007, 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 filed no response. The allegations in the motion are therefore undisputed. The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. Ruling on Motion for Default Judgment Section 102.20 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations provides that the allegations in the complaint shall be deemed admitted if an answer is not filed within 14 days from service of the complaint, unless good cause is shown. In addition, the complaint affirmatively states that the answer must be received by the Regional Office on or before July 13, 2007, or postmarked on or before July 12, 2007. The Respondent was additionally advised that an answer may also be filed electronically by using the E-filing system on the Agency’s website. Further, the undisputed allegations in the General Counsel’s mo- tion disclose that thereafter, the Region, by letter,1 noti- fied the Respondent that unless an answer were received by July 26, 2007, a motion for default judgment would be filed. 1 The Regional Director’s reminder letter was inadvertently dated June 19, 2007. A review of the letter indicates that it was written after the July 13, 2007 answer date had passed, and the affidavit of service indicates that the letter was mailed on July 19, 2007. In the absence of good cause being shown for the fail- ure to file a timely answer, we grant the General Coun- sel’s Motion for Default Judgment. On the entire record, the Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT I. JURISDICTION At all material times, the Respondent, a corporation with headquarters at 10 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, New York, has been engaged in providing security, fire, and emergency response services to commercial custom- ers, with offices and facilities at 4 Parklane Blvd., Suite 325, Dearborn, Michigan. During calendar year 2006, a representative period, the Respondent, in conducting its business operations described above, derived gross reve- nues in excess of $500,000 and provided services valued in excess of $50,000 directly to Ford Motor Company (Ford), an enterprise directly engaged in interstate com- merce. On about May 1, 2005, pursuant to a contract with Ford, Respondent commenced fire and emergency re- sponse services at Ford’s Rouge Industrial Complex and since that date has provided these services in basically unchanged form and has employed as a majority of its employees at the Rouge Industrial Complex individuals who were previously employees of Ford. We find that the Respondent is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act and that Local I-35, Dearborn Industrial Fire Fighters Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL–CIO, (the Union), is a labor organi- zation within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES At all material times, the following individuals held the positions set forth opposite their names and have been supervisors of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act and agents of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act: Michael Martin Vice President Tim Simcoe Manager in Charge of Dearborn Office At all material times, the following individuals held the positions set forth opposite their names and have been agents of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act: Rory G. Schnurr Negotiator Stephen E. Glazek Negotiator The following employees employed by Ford until about May 1, 2005, and by Respondent since that date, the unit, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 2 collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All fire specialists, fire specialists-EMT rescue techni- cians, and fire specialist-EMT rescue technician- captains employed at the Rouge Industrial Complex, excluding fire protection officers and inspectors, office and plant clerical employees, investigators, and super- visors as defined in the Act, and all other employees. Since at least 1979, until about May 1, 2005, the Union had been the exclusive collective-bargaining representa- tive of the unit employees employed by Ford and during that period of time the Union had been recognized as such by Ford. This recognition has been embodied in successive collective-bargaining agreements, the most recent of which was effective from May 1, 2003 until April 30, 2007. Since about May 1, 2005, based on the Respondent’s commencement of fire and emergency response services at Ford’s Rouge Industrial Complex in basically un- changed form, and its employment of a majority of the unit employees at the Rouge Industrial Complex who were previously employees of Ford, the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit employees employed by the Respondent. At all material times since May 1, 2005, based on Sec- tion 9(a) of the Act, the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit. About December 4, 2006, the Union requested that Respondent bargain collectively about health care bene- fits for the unit. Since on or about December 4, 2006, and continuing to date, the Respondent has failed and refused to meet and bargain collectively about health care benefits. The subject set forth above relates to terms and condi- tions of employment of the unit and is a mandatory sub- ject for the purposes of collective bargaining. CONCLUSION OF LAW By failing and refusing to meet and bargain with the Union about health care benefits for the unit employees, the Respondent has failed and refused to bargain collec- tively and in good faith with the exclusive collective- bargaining representative of its employees, and has thereby engaged in unfair labor practices affecting com- merce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. REMEDY Having found that the Respondent has engaged in cer- tain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to cease and desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act. Specifically, having found that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by failing and refusing to meet and bargain col- lectively with the exclusive collective-bargaining repre- sentative of its employees since December 4, 2006, about health care benefits for the unit employees, we shall or- der the Respondent, on request, to meet and bargain in good faith with the Union with respect to health care benefits, and, if an understanding is reached, to embody the understanding is a signed agreement. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Respondent, Guardsmark, LLC, Dearborn, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall 1. Cease and desist from (a) Failing and refusing to bargain collectively and in good faith with Local I-35, Dearborn Industrial Fire Fighters Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL–CIO, as the exclusive collective- bargaining representative of the employees in the follow- ing unit, by failing and refusing to meet and bargain col- lectively about health care benefits: All fire specialists, fire specialists-EMT rescue techni- cians, and fire specialist-EMT rescue technician- captains employed at the Rouge Industrial Complex, excluding fire protection officers and inspectors, office and plant clerical employees, investigators, and super- visors as defined in the Act, and all other employees. (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, re- straining, 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) On request, bargain collectively and in good faith with the Union as the exclusive representative of the em- ployees in the appropriate unit with respect to health care benefits, and, if an understanding is reached, embody the understanding in a signed agreement. (b) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at its facility in Dearborn, Michigan, copies of the attached notice marked “Appendix.”2 Copies of the notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 7, after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized repre- sentative, shall be posted by the Respondent and main- tained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are cus- 2 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 Na- tional Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg- ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board.” GUARDSMARK, LLC 3 tomarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. In the event that, during the pendency of these proceedings, the Re- spondent has gone out of business or closed the facility involved in these proceedings, the Respondent shall du- plicate and mail, at its own expense, a copy of the notice to all current employees and former employees employed by the Respondent at any time since December 4, 2006. (c) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file with the Regional Director a sworn certification of a re- sponsible official on a form provided by the Region at- testing to the steps that the Respondent has taken to comply. Dated, Washington, D.C. September 21, 2007 Robert J. Battista, Chairman Wilma B. Liebman, Member Dennis P. Walsh, 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 vio- lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey this notice. FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO Form, join, or assist a union Choose representatives to bargain with us on your behalf Act together with other employees for your bene- fit and protection Choose not to engage in any of these protected activities. WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to bargain collectively and in good faith with Local I-35, Dearborn Industrial Fire Fighters Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL–CIO, as the exclusive collective bargain- ing representative of the employees in the following unit, by failing and refusing to meet and bargain collectively about health care benefits: All fire specialists, fire specialists-EMT rescue techni- cians, and fire specialist-EMT rescue technician- captains employed at the Rouge Industrial Complex, excluding fire protection officers and inspectors, office and plant clerical employees, investigators, and super- visors as defined in the Act, and all other employees. 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. WE WILL, on request, bargain collectively and in good faith with the Union as the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit with respect to health care benefits, and, if an understanding is reached, WE WILL embody the understanding in a signed agreement. GUARDSMARK, LLC