MICROPOWER USA CORP.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 11, 2016

363 NLRB No. 93 (N.L.R.B. 2016)

363 NLRB No. 93
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex-
ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C.
20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can
be included in the bound volumes.
Micropower USA Corp. and Professionals at
Micropower New York State United Teachers
and Greg Sandler and Amina Chowdhury. Cases
02–CA–130858, 02–CA–132236, 02–CA–132592,
and 02–CA–132830
January 11, 2016
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN PEARCE AND MEMBERS MISCIMARRA
AND HIROZAWA
The General Counsel seeks default judgment in this
case on the ground that the Respondent has failed to file
an answer to the amended compliance specification.
On March 31, 2015, the National Labor Relations
Board issued a Decision and Order,1 that, among other
things, ordered Respondent Micropower USA Corp., to
make whole discriminatees Alex Albaret, Valmike
Apuzen, Florentino Capili, Amina Chowdhury, Imelda
Lapid, Ntumba Mukendi, Felicity Nduku, Gwendolyn
Nisbett, Greg Sandler, and Nevdoyle Santana, for any
loss of earnings and other benefits resulting from the
Respondent’s unfair labor practices in violation of Sec-
tion 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act.
A controversy having arisen over the amount of
backpay due the discriminatees, on September 15, 2015,
the Acting Regional Director issued an amended compli-
ance specification and notice of hearing to the Respond-
ent, alleging the amount due under the Board’s Order and
notifying the Respondent that it should file an answer by
October 6, 2015, complying with the Board’s Rules and
Regulations. Although properly served with a copy of
the amended compliance specification,2 the Respondent
failed to file an answer.
By letter dated October 15, 2015, the Region advised
the Respondent that no answer to the amended compli-
ance specification had been received, and that unless an
answer was filed by October 19, 2015, the Board may
find, pursuant to a motion for default judgment, that the
allegations in the amended compliance specification are
true. To date, the Respondent has not filed an answer.
On October 19, 2015, the General Counsel filed with
the Board a Motion for Default Judgment, with exhibits
attached. On October 20, 2015, the Board issued an or-
der transferring the proceeding to the Board and a Notice

1 362 NLRB No. 63.
2 On August 31, 2015, the Regional Director issued and served a
compliance specification on the Respondent. The Respondent failed to
file an answer to the compliance specification.
to Show Cause why the motion should not be granted.
The Respondent again filed no response. The allegations
in the motion and in the amended compliance specifica-
tion are therefore undisputed.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on the Motion for Default Judgment
Section 102.56(a) of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions provides that a respondent shall file an answer
within 21 days from service of a compliance specifica-
tion. Section 102.56(c) provides that if the respondent
fails to file an answer to the specification within the time
prescribed by this section, the Board may, either with or
without taking evidence in support of the allegations of
the specification and without further notice to the re-
spondent, find the specification to be true and enter such
order as may be appropriate.
According to the uncontroverted allegations of the mo-
tion for default judgment, the Respondent, despite having
been advised of the filing requirements, has failed to file
an answer to the amended compliance specification. In
the absence of good cause for the Respondent’s failure to
file an answer, we deem the allegations in the amended
compliance specification to be admitted as true, and we
grant the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judg-
ment. Accordingly, we conclude that the backpay due
the discriminatees is as stated in the amended compliance
specification, and we will order the Respondent to pay
those amounts, plus interest accrued to the date of pay-
ment.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Micropower USA Corp., New York, New
York, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
make whole discriminatees Alex Albaret, Valmike
Apuzen, Florentino Capili, Amina Chowdhury, Imelda
Lapid, Ntumba Mukendi, Felicity Nduku, Gwendolyn
Nisbett, Greg Sandler, and Nevdoyle Santana, by paying
them the amounts following their names, plus interest
accrued to the date of payment, as prescribed in New
Horizons, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987), compounded daily as
prescribed in Kentucky River Medical Center, 356 NLRB
No. 8 (2010), and minus tax withholdings required by
Federal and State laws:3

3 As set forth in the amended compliance specification, the Re-
spondent is also liable for any adverse tax consequences for any
discriminatee receiving a lump-sum backpay award. Although the
amended compliance specification calculated the adverse tax conse-
quences, that amount may be updated to reflect the actual date of pay-
ment.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD2
Alex Albaret $ 867.00
Valmike Apuzen 8,880.00
Florentino Capili 10,405.00
Amina Chowdhury 6,900.00
Imelda Lapid 11,994.00
Ntumba Mukendi 9,181.00
Felicity Nduku 9,180.00
Gwendolyn Nisbett 272.00
Greg Sandler 5,440.00
Nevdoyle Santana 5,678.00
Total Backpay Due $68,797.00
Dated, Washington, D.C. January 11, 2016
______________________________________
Mark Gaston Pearce, Chairman
______________________________________
Philip A. Miscimarra, Member
______________________________________
Kent Y. Hirozawa, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD