Island Management Partners, Inc. and Production Personnel, Inc., a single employer and Ian Roberson

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Jun 25, 2021

12-CA-140702 (N.L.R.B. Jun. 25, 2021)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ISLAND MANAGEMENT PARTNERS, INC. and
PRODUCTION PERSONNEL, INC, a single employer
and IAN ROBERSON
and Case 12-CA-140702
INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCE OF THEATRICAL
STAGE EMPLOYEES AND MOVING PICTURE
TECHNICIANS, ARTISTS, AND ALLIED CRAFTS
OF THE UNITED STATES, ITS TERRITORIES AND
CANADA, LOCAL 500, AFL-CIO, CLC
ORDER1
On May 18, 2021, the Acting General Counsel filed with the Board a request for special
permission to appeal Administrative Law Judge Paul Bogas’s order granting in part the
Respondents’ petition to revoke the Acting General Counsel’s subpoenas duces tecum.2 The
request is granted.
On the merits, we conclude that the judge abused his discretion in limiting the subpoenas’
temporal scope, as the requested documents are relevant to the issues presented in this
proceeding and may yield probative evidence regarding the parties’ relationships as of the
commission of the unfair labor practices. Cf. Viking Industrial Security, Inc. v. NLRB, 225 F.3d
131 (2d Cir. 2000) (due process requires that affiliation between two companies existed at the
time of the unfair labor practice proceeding, or at least the time the complaint was served, to
impose derivative liability in the compliance proceeding); Aiken Underground Utility Services,
336 NLRB 1033 (2001) (adopting the holding from Viking Industrial Security). Additionally, it
1 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-
member panel.
2 The Acting General Counsel issued seven subpoenas duces tecum that differed only in the
address at which they were served.
2
is unclear from the record which temporal limitation imposed by the judge applies to which
records because some of the requests speak to the corporate interrelationship and also have the
potential to provide evidence of Respondent Roberson’s personal use and enjoyment of corporate
assets. Thus, we find that the imposition of different temporal limitations on requests seeking
corporate documents and those seeking personal documents lacks specificity and is unsupported
by law.
Accordingly, we grant the appeal, reverse that aspect of the judge’s Order partially
granting the Respondents’ petition to revoke subpoenas duces tecum, and remand for further
action as appropriate.
Dated, Washington, D.C., June 25, 2021.
LAUREN McFERRAN CHAIRMAN
WILLIAM J. EMANUEL MEMBER
JOHN F. RING MEMBER