Extract
Raycor Co., 565 (1980)
RAYCOR CO. 565
Raimund Corssen Co., Inc. d/b/a Raycor Co. and Local 259, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America and Russell Labriola. Cases 29-CA-5892 and 29-CA-5892-2May 16, 1980 DECISION AND ORDERBY MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, AND TRUESDALEOn December 31, 1979, Administrative Law Judge Robert G. Romano issued the attached Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions and the General Counsel filed cross-exceptions. I Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.The Board has considered the record and the attached Decision in light of the exceptions and cross-exceptions, and has decided to affirm the rulings, 2 findings, 3 and conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge and to adopt his recommended Order.4 ' Local 259, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, a Charging Party in this proceeding, filed a letter stating that 'we adopt and affirm all the exceptions submitted to the Board by the General Counsel.' 2 Member Penello notes that the Administrative Law Judge determined that backpay for the discharged strikers be computed from September 8, 1977-the date of the discharges. Member Penello would adhere to the more than 30 years' Board precedent set forth in his dissenting opinion in Abilities and Goodwill, Inc., 241 NLRB No. 5 (1979), and find that employees who are unlawfully discharged while on strike must indicate abandonment of the strike and a willingness to return to work in order to initiate the running of the backpay eligibility period.Unlike his colleagues, Member Truesdale would date Respondent's bargaining obligation from August 10, 1977, the date of the Union's demand for recognition with a majority showing, which demand Respondent refused. See Chandler Motors, Inc., 236 NLRB 1565, 1566, fn. 5 (1978).3 Respondent and the General Counsel have excepted to certain credibility findings made by the Administrative Law Judge. It is the Board's established policy not to overrule an administrative law judge's resolutions with respect to credibility unless the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence convinces us that the resolutions are incorrect Standard Dry Wall Products. Inc., 91 NLRB 544 (1950), enfd. 188 F.2d 362 (3d Cir. 1951). We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing his findings.In adopting the Administrative Law Judge's finding that the discharges of Algerio and Stone were not violative of Sec. 8(a)(3) of the Act, Members Jenkins and Truesdale rely on his finding that the discharges were solely for cause.Member Penello notes that in the section of the attached Decision analyzing the discharges of Algerio and Stone, the Administrative Lass Judge cited General Tire of Miami Beach. Inc. v. .L.R.B., 332 F.2d 58, 60 (5th Cir. 1964), for the general proposition that a discharge may be an unfair labor practice if an unlawful motive played 'any part' in the managerial decision. Member Penello further notes that he does not find it necessary to adopt the Administrative Law Judge's reference to the 'in part' test in order to affirm the conclusion that Algerio's and Stone's terminations were not violative of Sec 8(a)( 3 ) 4 Although we adopt the Administrati.e Law Judge's recommended broad cease-and-desist Order. we do not rely oil Abhilities and Gdwill,Inc., supra at fn 14 In Hlickmott Foods. Inc., 242 NLRB No 177 (1979), 249 NLRB No. 78 ORDERPursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommended Order of the Administrative Law Judge and hereby orders that the Respondent, Raimund Corssen Co., Inc. d/b/a Raycor Co., Oyster Bay, New York, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the said recommended Order, except that the attached notice is substituted for that of the Administrative Law Judge.the Board modified its prior policy of issuing such orders in all cases involving discriminatory discharges and concluded that 'each case will be analyzed to determine the nature and extent of the violations committed.' In the instant case we find that the severe nature of Respondent's discharges (dissipating one-half of the unit), coupled with other violations, warrants broad injunctive relief The Administrative Law Judge failed to include in his notice that portion of his recommended Order providing for the reinstatement of employees Labriola and Falabella. We shall modify the Administrative Law Judge's notice to correct this inadvertent error.APPENDIXNOTICE To EMPLOYEES POSTED BY ORDER OF THENATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDAn Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT interrogate our employees concerning their union interests, sympathies, and activities, and as to...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
