Extract
Wright Motors, Inc., 570 (1978)
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Wright Motors, Inc. and Local 215, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America. Case 25 CA 8920August 15, 1978 DECISION AND ORDERBY CHAIRMAN FANNIN(; AN[) MEMBEiRS PI N: Ii () AND TRt FSDALtI On May 4, 1978, Administrative Law Judge Abraham Frank issued the attached Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief. The General Counsel filed a brief in support of the Administrative Law Judge's [)ecision.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 briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings, findings,' and conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge and to adopt his recommended Order.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 herebh orders that the Respondent, Wright Motors, Inc.. Evansville, Indiana, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the said recommended Order.In adopting the Administrative law Judge's I)ecision. se place noirehance on the fact that Respondent chose tI liIigate the question of its obhlgalion to bargain. (f. ( oninental Nut (oipuotnl. s195 NIRB 841B 1972.DECISION AND RECOMMENDED ORDERABRAHAM FRANK, Administrative Law Judge: The charge in this case was filed on May 9. 1977,1 and the complaint.alleging violations of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, issued on July 29. The hearing was held at Evansville, Indiana, on October 25.2 The General Counsel and the Respondent filed briefs, which have been duly considered.The issue in this case is whether Respondent, since November 9, 1976, refused to bargain with the Union in good All dates are in 1977 unless otherwise indicated ' The motion of the parties to correct the transcript in ninor repecls is granted.faith with a sincere intention to enter into a final collectivebargaining agreement.FINI)INGS ()i FA.(C AND (CONCI.[SIONS OF LAW A. Prelinlnart Findings and Conclusions The Respondent, Wright Motors. Inc., is an Indiana corporation engaged in the business of servicing and distributing new and used cars in Evansville, Indiana. Respondent admits, and I find, that it is engaged in...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
