Greensburg Manfacturing, LLC

355 NLRB No. 139 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. Greensburg Manufacturing, LLC and International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Ag- ricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW. Case 25–CA–30467 August 26, 2010 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN LIEBMAN AND MEMBERS SCHAUMBER AND HAYES On June 24, 2009, the two sitting members of the Board issued a Decision and Order in this proceeding, which is reported at 354 NLRB No. 35.1 Thereafter, the General Counsel filed an application for summary en- forcement. On June 17, 2010, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, 130 S.Ct. 2635, holding that under Section 3(b) of the Act, in order to exercise the delegated authority of the Board, a delegee group of at least three members must be maintained. Thereafter, the court of appeals remanded this case for further proceedings consistent with the Su- preme Court’s decision. The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.2 1 Effective midnight December 28, 2007, Members Liebman, Schaumber, Kirsanow, and Walsh delegated to Members Liebman, Schaumber, and Kirsanow, as a three-member group, all of the powers of the National Labor Relations Board in anticipation of the expiration of the terms of Members Kirsanow and Walsh on December 31, 2007. Thereafter, pursuant to this delegation, the two sitting members issued decisions and orders in unfair labor practice and representation cases. 2 Consistent with the Board’s general practice in cases remanded from the courts of appeals, and for reasons of administrative economy, the panel includes the members who participated in the original deci- As described more fully in the above-referenced deci- sion, the Acting General Counsel seeks a Judgment on the Pleadings in this case on the ground that the Respon- dent has filed an answer to the amended compliance specification that admits all the allegations set forth in the amended compliance specification and raises no af- firmative defenses. Ruling on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings As stated above, the Respondent’s answer to the amended compliance specification admitted all of the allegations in the compliance specification, including the allegations that the Respondent owes certain amounts of backpay to each of the 30 listed individuals. Absent any material issue of fact or law, we grant the General Coun- sel’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Accord- ingly, we adopt the findings, conclusions, and Order set forth in the Decision and Order reported at 354 NLRB No. 35, which is incorporated by reference. . Dated, Washington, D.C. August 26, 2010 Wilma B. Liebman, Chairman Peter C. Schaumber, Member Brian E. Hayes, Member (SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sion. Furthermore, under the Board’s standard procedures applicable to all cases assigned to a panel, the Board Members not assigned to the panel had the opportunity to participate in the adjudication of this case at any time up to the issuance of this decision.