Shamrock Foods Company

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Oct 11, 2018

28-CA-150157 (N.L.R.B. Oct. 11, 2018)

1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
SHAMROCK FOODS COMPANY
and Case 28-CA-150157
BAKERY, CONFECTIONERY, TOBACCO
WORKERS’ AND GRAIN MILLERS
INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL
UNION NO. 232, AFL-CIO-CLC
NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE
On February 11, 2016, Administrative Law Judge Jeffrey D. Wedekind issued a
decision in this case. The Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, the
General Counsel filed an answering brief, and the Respondent filed a reply brief. The
General Counsel and Charging Party each filed cross-exceptions and supporting briefs,
and the Respondent filed answering briefs.
On June 22, 2018, the Board issued a decision, 366 NLRB No. 117, ruling on the
exceptions to many of the complaint allegations, but it severed and retained for future
consideration the complaint allegations that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) by
maintaining certain work rules or policies. In the underlying decision, the judge applied
the “reasonably construe” prong of the Board’s decision in Lutheran Heritage Village-
Livonia, 343 NLRB 646 (2004) (Lutheran Heritage). Recently, the Board overruled the
Lutheran Heritage “reasonably construe” test and announced a new standard that applies
retroactively to all pending cases. The Boeing Co., 365 NLRB No. 154, slip op. at 14-17
(2017). Having duly considered the matter,
2
NOTICE IS GIVEN that cause be shown, in writing, filed with the Board in
Washington, D.C., on or before October 25, 2018 (with affidavit of service on the parties
to this proceeding), why the complaint allegations involving the maintenance of allegedly
unlawful work rules or policies under Lutheran Heritage should not be severed and
remanded to the administrative law judge for further proceedings consistent with the
Board’s decision in Boeing, including reopening the record if necessary. Any response
should address whether a remand would affect the Board’s ability to resolve the
remaining complaint allegations, including whether those allegations should be severed
and retained or instead included in the remand. Any briefs or statements supporting or
opposing a remand shall be filed on the same date.
Dated, Washington, D.C., October 11, 2018.
By direction of the Board:
/s/ Roxanne L. Rothschild
Executive Secretary