Harvard Maintenance, Inc., (2023)

Date01 November 2023
JD(NY)-19-23
New York, NY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIVISION OF JUDGES
NEW YORK BRANCH OFFICE
HARVARD MAINTENANCE INC.
and Case Nos.: 02–CA254451
02–CA258382
CARINA CRUZ, AN INDIVIDUAL
Nicole Oliver, Esq., Counsel for
the General Counsel
Steven Swirsky, Esq., Corey Argust, Esq. and
Laura Schuman, Esq., Counsel for the
Respondent
DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
JEFFREY P. GARDNER, Administrative Law Judge. The charge in case 2CA254451
was filed January 10, 2020, and the charge in case 2CA258382 was filed March 28, 2020.
An initial complaint was issued on June 12, 20201and thereafter the within Consolidated
Complaint was issued on July 14, 2022. In substance the General Counsel allegesthat (a)
Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by making multiple threats to the Charging Party
for engaging in union activities and (b) Respondent violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act by
suspending and later discharging the Charging Party in retaliation for her engaging in union
activities. Respondent filed a timely Answer, denying the substantive allegations.
Beginning December 14, 2022, and ending January 4, 2023,pursuant to the Board’s
decision in William Beaumont Hospital, 370 NLRB No. 9 (Aug. 13, 2020), and with all-party
consent, I conducted a trial via Zoom Government, during which all parties were afforded the
opportunity to present their evidence. On March 8, 2023, the General Counsel and Respondent
each filed timely briefs.2
Upon consideration of the entire record and the Briefs filed, I make the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
Based on the pleadings and stipulated facts, the Respondent admitted and I find that the
Respondent is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2) (6) & (7)
of the Act, and that the Union, SEIU Local 32BJ (“the Union”) is a labor organization within the
1That initial complaint was a consolidated complaint including two additional charges that were later withdrawn.
2The Charging Party, an individual, did not submit a separate post-hearing brief.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT