Bannum Place of Saginaw

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 17, 2018

07-CA-207685 (N.L.R.B. Dec. 17, 2018)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
BANNUM PLACE OF SAGINAW
and Case 07-CA-207685
07-CA-215356
LOCAL 406, INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS (IBT)
and
ERNIE AHMAD Case 07-CA-211090
ORDER1
The Employer’s Petition to Revoke subpoena duces tecum B-1-11EJ5YH is
denied. The subpoena seeks information relevant to the matters under investigation
and describes with sufficient particularity the evidence sought, as required by Section
11(1) of the Act and Section 102.31(b) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations. 2 Further,
the Employer has failed to establish any other legal basis for revoking the subpoena.3

1 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a
three-member panel.
2 In considering the petition to revoke, we have evaluated the subpoena in light of the
Region’s statements in its opposition brief that it is willing to limit the time period for the
information requested in pars. 1 and 2 to January 1, 2017 to the present, as well as to
limit the scope of the discipline/discharges to infractions of theft of time, job
abandonment, attendance violations, work performance, insubordination, and failure to
follow the Charged Party's Prison Rape Enforcement Act (PREA) policy; that it modifies
its requests in pars. 6 and 11 to exclude documents reflecting employee medical
information and to permit the redaction of employee social security numbers, birth
dates, and banking information; and that it limits the scope of par. 8 to the date that the
Employer’s Director was hired and to documents constituting internal emails to and from
the Director.
3 To the extent that the Employer has provided some of the requested material, it is not
required to produce that information again, provided that the Employer accurately
describes which documents under subpoena it has already provided, identifies to which
subpoena paragraph(s) they are responsive, states whether those previously-provided
2
See generally NLRB v. North Bay Plumbing, Inc., 102 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 1996); NLRB
v. Carolina Food Processors, Inc., 81 F.3d 507 (4th Cir. 1996).
Dated, Washington, D.C., December 17, 2018.
JOHN F. RING, CHAIRMAN
LAUREN McFERRAN, MEMBER
MARVIN E. KAPLAN, MEMBER

documents constitute all of the requested documents, and provides all of the information
that was subpoenaed.