Jolly King Restaurant

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 29, 1975

225 N.L.R.B. 280 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

280 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Seven Brothers , Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restaurant and
Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with
the Hotel , Restaurant Employees and Bartenders
International Union , AFL-CIO. Case 19-CA-8286
June 29, 1975
DECISION AND ORDER
By MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, AND WALTHER
Upon a charge filed on January 16, 1976, by Seat-
tle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the
Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Bartenders Inter-
national Union, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union,
and duly served on Seven Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly
King Restaurant, herein called the Respondent, the
General Counsel of the National Labor Relations
Board, by the Regional Director for Region 19, is-
sued a complaint and notice of hearing on March 4,
1976, against Respondent, alleging that Respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor
practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies
of the charge, complaint, and notice of hearing be-
fore an Administrative Law Judge were duly served
on the parties to this proceeding.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the com-
plaint alleges in substance that on or about June 1,
1975, the Union was duly recognized as the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of Respondent's
employees in the unit found appropriate; that, com-
mencing on or about August 21, 1975, Respondent,
through an agent, agreed to sign a collective-bargain-
ing agreement with the Union and that at all times
since has failed and refused to execute the agree-
ment; and that on or about September 10, 1975, the
Union requested Respondent to furnish wage data
on unit employees and Respondent has failed and
refused to furnish the Union with the data requested,
and at all times thereafter Respondent has refused,
and continues to date to refuse, to bargain collec-
tively with the Union as the exclusive bargaining rep-
resentative, although the Union has requested and is
requesting it to do so. Respondent failed to file an
answer to the complaint.
On April 6, 1976, counsel for the General Counsel
filed directly with the Board a Motion for Summary
Judgment. Subsequently, on April 16, 1976, the
Board issued an order transferring the proceeding to
the Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the
General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment
should not be granted. Respondent thereafter filed a
response to Notice To Show Cause.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following:
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Section 102.20 of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, provides as follows:
The respondent shall, within 10 days from the
service of the complaint, file an answer thereto.
The respondent shall specifically admit, deny, or
explain each of the facts alleged in the com-
plaint, unless the respondent is without knowl-
edge, in which case the respondent shall so state,
such statement operating as a denial. All allega-
tions in the complaint, if no answer is filed, or
any allegation in the complaint not specifically
denied or explained in an answer filed, unless
the respondent shall state in the answer that he
is without knowledge, shall be deemed to be ad-
mitted to be true and shall be so found by the
Board, unless good cause to the contrary is
shown.
The complaint and notice of hearing served on Re-
spondent specifically states that unless an answer to
the complaint is filed by Respondent within 10 days
of service thereof "all of the allegations in the Com-
plaint shall be deemed to be admitted by it to be true
and may be so found by the Board." Further, ac-
cording to the Motion for Summary Judgment, coun-
sel for the General Counsel telephoned Respondent 4
days after the time for answering the complaint had
expired, informing the Respondent of its default and
the attendant consequences, and extending the time
to answer to 10 days. On the following day Re-
spondent's attorney advised counsel for the General
Counsel that he no longer represented the Respon-
dent in labor matters and furnished Respondent's
home phone number. Calls to the phone number in-
dicated that it had been disconnected.
In view of Respondent's failure to file an answer,
under the rule set forth above, and no good cause
having been shown for such failure, the allegations of
the complaint are deemed to be, and are found to be,
true and we shall, accordingly, grant the Motion for
Summary Judgment.
On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes
the following:
225 NLRB No. 41
JOLLY KING RESTAURANT 281
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
Respondent owns and operates a restaurant ad-
joining a Royal Inn Hotel near the Seattle, Washing-
ton, airport. During the past year Respondent and
Royal Inn sold products and performed services val-
ued in excess of $500,000. During the same period
Respondent and Royal Inn purchased goods and
materials valued in excess of $50,000, which were de-
livered directly from States other than Washington.
During this period Respondent and Royal Inn pur-
chased goods and materials valued in excess of
$50,000 which were transported to said facilities from
enterprises in the State of Washington, which enter-
prises had received said goods and materials directly
from States other than Washington. Respondent's
restaurant is located on the premises of the Royal
Inn with which it is connected by a covered walkway
and with which it shares common entrances and ex-
its. Meals and beverages served at Respondent's fa-
cility, which includes a cocktail lounge denominated
"The Lost Knight," may be charged to the guests'
hotel bills at Royal Inn. Brochures and postcards at
the hotel advertise the services available at
Respondent's Jolly King restaurant and Lost Knight
lounge. Respondent and Royal Inn are thus an inte-
grated enterprise for jurisdictional purposes.
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Re-
spondent is, and has been at all times material here-
in, an employer engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that
it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert juris-
diction herein.
Washington, excluding all office clerical em-
ployees, confidential employees, and guards and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
The Union was recognized as the collective-bargain-
ing representative of the employees in said unit on
June 1, 1975, and the Union continues to be such
exclusive representative within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9(a) of the Act.
B. The Request To Bargain and Respondent's Refusal
Commencing on or about August 21, 1975, and at
all times thereafter, the Union has requested the Re-
spondent to bargain collectively with it as the exclu-
sive collective-bargaining representative of all the
employees in the above-described unit. Commencing
on or about August 21, 1975, and continuing at all
times thereafter to date, the Respondent has refused,
and continues to refuse, to recognize and bargain
with the Union as the exclusive representative for
collective bargaining of all employees in said unit, by
refusing to execute a collective-bargaining agreement
with the Union to which it had previously agreed,
and, since on or about September 10, 1975, Respon-
dent has refused to furnish the Union data relating to
wages of unit employees.
Accordingly, we find that the Respondent has,
since August 21, 1975, and at all times thereafter,
refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the
exclusive representative of the employees in the ap-
propriate unit, and that, by such refusal, Respondent
has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of
the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with
the Hotel , Restaurant Employees and Bartenders In-
ternational Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Representation Proceeding
1. The unit
The following employees of the Respondent con-
stitute a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining
purposes within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act:
All employees of Respondent at its facility lo-
cated at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle,
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON
COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent, set forth in section
III, above, occurring in connection with its opera-
tions described in section I, above, have a close, inti-
mate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic,
and commerce among the several States and tend to
lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing
commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall
order that it cease and desist therefrom, and, upon
request, bargain collectively with the Union as the
exclusive representative of all employees in the ap-
propriate unit, and, if an understanding is reached,
282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
embody such understanding in a signed agreement.
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Seven Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restau-
rant is an employer engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Seattle Local Joint Executive Board affiliated
with the Hotel, Restaurant Employees and Barten-
ders International Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor orga-
nization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the
Act.
3. All employees of Respondent at its facility lo-
cated at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle,
Washington, excluding all office clerical employees,
confidential employees, and guards and supervisors
as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.
4. Since on or about June 1, 1975, the above-
named labor organization has been and now is the
recognized and exclusive representative of all em-
ployees in the aforesaid appropriate unit for the pur-
pose of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9(a) of the Act.
5. By refusing on or about August 21, 1975, and
September 10, 1975, and at all times thereafter, to
bargain collectively with the above-named labor or-
ganization as the exclusive bargaining representative
of all the employees of Respondent in the appropri-
ate unit, by refusing to execute a previously agreed-
upon contract, and by failing to furnish the Union
wage data on unit employees, Respondent has en-
gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) of the Act.
6. By the aforesaid refusal to bargain, Respondent
has interfered with, restrained, and coerced, and is
interfering with, restraining, and coercing, employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them in
Section 7 of the Act, and thereby has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
lations Board hereby orders that Respondent Seven
Brothers, Ltd. d/b/a Jolly King Restaurant, Seattle,
Washington, its officers, agents, successors, and as-
signs, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning
rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and con-
ditions of employment by refusing to execute a con-
tract previously agreed to, and by failing to furnish
unit wage data to Seattle Local Joint Executive
Board affiliated with the Hotel, Restaurant Employ-
ees and Bartenders International Union, AFL-CIO,
as the exclusive bargaining representative of its em-
ployees in the following appropriate unit:
All employees of Respondent at its facility lo-
cated at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seattle,
Washington, excluding all office clerical em-
ployees, confidential employees, and guards and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the
Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Upon request, execute a previously agreed-to
contract and furnish unit wage data requested to the
above-named labor organization as the exclusive rep-
resentative of all employees in the aforesaid appro-
priate unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours,
and other terms and conditions of employment.
(b) Post at its restaurant at 18220 Pacific Highway
South, Seattle, Washington, copies of the attached
notice marked "Appendix." I Copies of said notice,
on forms provided by the Regional Director for Re-
gion 19, after being duly signed by Respondent's rep-
resentative, shall be posted by Respondent immedi-
ately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it
for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous
places, including all places where notices to employ-
ees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be
taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are
not altered, defaced, or covered by any other materi-
al.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 19, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps have been taken to comply herewith.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re-
In the event that this Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order
of the National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a
Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board "
JOLLY KING RESTAURANT 283
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively
concerning rates of pay , wages, hours, and other
terms and conditions of employment by refusing
to execute a contract previously agreed to and
by failing to furnish unit wage data to Seattle
Local Joint Executive Board affiliated with the
Hotel , Restaurant Employees and Bartenders
International Union , AFL-CIO, as the exclusive
representative of the employees in the bargain-
ing unit described below.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner
interfere with , restrain, or coerce our employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by
Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, upon request , bargain with the
above-named Union , as the exclusive represen-
tative of all employees in the bargaining unit de-
scribed below , with respect to rates of pay, wag-
es, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment , and, if an understanding is
reached , embody such understanding in a signed
agreement. The bargaining unit is:
All employees of Respondent at its facility
located at 18220 Pacific Highway South, Seat-
tle, Washington , excluding all office clerical
employees , confidential employees, and
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
SEVEN BROTHERS , LTD d/b/a JOLLY KING
RESTAURANT