Club Quarters Grand Central

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board DecisionsJul 15, 2021

02-CA-268840 (N.L.R.B. Jul. 15, 2021)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CLUB QUARTERS GRAND CENTRAL and Case 02-CA-268840 NEW YORK HOTEL AND MOTEL TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO ORDER1 The Employer’s Petition to Revoke and Objections to subpoena duces tecum B-1- 1CLN383 is denied.2 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. Further, the Employer has failed to establish any other legal basis for revoking the subpoena.3 See generally NLRB v. North Bay Plumbing, Inc., 102 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 1996); NLRB v. Carolina Food Processors, Inc., 81 1 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three- member panel. 2 The Employer’s request that its petition to revoke be made part of the official record in this case is denied without prejudice to renewal at the appropriate time in a formal proceeding. 3 To the extent that the Employer asserts that it does not possess certain requested documents, including documents allegedly in the possession of third parties, it is not required to produce requested evidence that it does not possess, but it is required to conduct a reasonable and diligent search for all requested evidence. Further, with respect to any requested information not in the Employer’s possession, custody, or control, the subpoena compels the Employer to request such information from other persons or companies, if necessary. If the information does not exist, or if the other persons or companies decline to provide the information, the Employer must affirmatively represent this fact to the Region. See Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., 346 NLRB 696, 702 fn. 10 (2006) (“In responding to a subpoena, an individual is required to produce documents not only in his or her possession, but any documents that he or she had a legal right to obtain,” citing Searock v. Stripling, 736 F.2d 650, 653 (11th Cir. 1984)). Moreover, if the other persons or companies do not comply with a request for the information from the Employer, nothing would prevent the Region from seeking that information directly from the other persons or companies. 2 F.3d 507 (4th Cir. 1996). In response to the Region’s request, we direct the Employer to produce the documents responsive to the subpoena within 7 business days of the issuance of this Order. Dated, Washington, D.C., July 15, 2021. LAUREN McFERRAN, CHAIRMAN MARVIN E. KAPLAN, MEMBER JOHN F. RING, MEMBER