Extract
SCA Tissue North America, LLC, 1130 (2003)
SCA Tissue North America, LLC and Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC. Case 28- CA-17548
April 30, 2003 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN BATTISTA AND MEMBERS LIEBMAN AND ACOSTA On August 22, 2002, Administrative Law Judge Gregory Z. Meyerson issued the attached decision. The Respondent filed exceptions, a supporting brief, and a reply brief. The General Counsel filed a brief in response to the exceptions. 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 and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findings,1 and conclusions2 and to adopt the recommended Order. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board adopts the recommended Order of the administrative law judge and orders that the Respondent, SCA Tissue North America, LLC, Bellemont, Arizona, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall take the action set forth in the Order. 1 The Board's established policy is not to overrule credibility resolutions unless the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence convinces us that the credibility determinations are incorrect. Standard Dry Wall Products, 91 NLRB 544 (1950), enfd. 188 F.2d 362 (3d Cir. 1951). We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing the findings. 2 In adopting the judge's finding that the General Counsel met his burden of establishing that Sandoval's union activity was a motivating factor for his discharge, we rely on the following evidence of animus: (1) Plant Manager Graverson's warning to all employees that they could not talk about the Union on the shop floor, when no such restriction existed for other topics; (2) Supervisor Stievo's order to Sandoval to remove his union button because it violated the Respondent's "no jewelry" policy, which had never been enforced; (3) Stievo's direction to Sandoval to cover up his union T-shirt with his jacket while he was walking across the shop floor; and (4) Stievo's parting comment to Sandoval about his "attitude." Contrary to the judge, we do not infer animus from the Respondent's hiring of a labor consultant, or from the fact that members of management cried at an emotionally charged meeting with employees during the campaign. Additionally, we do not rely on the timing of Sandoval's discharge to establish a violation of the Act. Member Liebman would rely on timing as an additional factor in finding the Respondent's unlawful motivation for the discharge of Sandoval on September 24, 2001. She agrees with the judge that, in the circumstances, Sandoval's increased organizing activity beginning in August, and the possibility of a new representation election in early December contributed to the Respondent's determination to fire him unlawfully. William Mabry III and Jerome E. Schmidt, for the General Counsel.Susan M. Love, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for the Respondent. DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE GREGORY Z. MEYERSON, Administrative Law Judge. Pursuant to notice, I hear...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
