Extract
Albany Electrical Contractors Assn., 730 (1999)
February 25, 1999
DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS FOX, HURTGEN, AND BRAME On October 7, 1997, Administrative Law Judge Joel P. Biblowitz issued the attached decision. The General Counsel filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and the Respondent filed cross-exceptions and an answering brief. The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the decision and the record in light of the exceptions, cross-exceptions, and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findings, and conclusions and to adopt the recommended Order, as modified. 1. The judge found, inter alia, that the Respondent violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) of the Act by failing to operate its hiring hall in conformity with the written requirements of its collective-bargaining agreement with Albany Electrical Contractors Association. More particularly, the judge found that the Respondent failed to adhere to written rules requiring applicants to re-sign the out-of-work book every 30 days, failed to enforce referral rules applicable to registrants who were over age 50, and failed to enforce contractual requirements pursuant to the "short call" definition of 40 hours, which identified jobs that an applicant could accept without losing his place on the referral list. No exceptions were filed to the judge's findings that the Respondent violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) in these respects. The General Counsel contends that the judge's remedy for these violations is inadequate because it lacks a make-whole order applicable to users of the hiring hall who may have been detrimentally affected by the Respondent's failure to comply with the above-noted contractual rules. We agree. The complaint alleges that since May 22, 1996, the Respondent failed to refer applicants for employment in accordance with the contractual referral procedures. The complaint does not identify any particular applicant by name who may have been affected by the Respondent's failure to adhere to its written referral rules as set forth above.1 Instead, the General Counsel effectively alleges a class of applicants who were subject to the Respondent's hiring hall referral practices beginning May 22, DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD1996, the commencement of the 10(b) period, to March 3, 1997, the effective date of the Respondent's renewed adherence to contractual requirements. 2 The judge found that the Respondent's failure to follow the contractual provisions did not cause applicants Haggerty, James, or Daly to lose any referrals, although, as explained in sec. 2 below, he found that James was detrimentally affected by the Respondent's arbitrary failure to follow its actual practice regarding "s...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
