The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a Decision and Order against New Vista Nursing and Rehabilitation Center (the Respondent) after the Acting General Counsel moved for a default judgment. The underlying case involved charges filed by 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East (the Union) alleging violations of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act (the Act).

The Union had filed charges alleging that the Respondent refused to furnish requested information and refused to bargain collectively. Subsequently, the Respondent and the Union entered into an informal settlement agreement, approved by the Regional Director, which required the Respondent to provide information to the Union, meet and bargain with the Union, post a Notice to Employees, and provide proof of compliance. The settlement agreement contained a specific provision for non-compliance: if the Respondent failed to remedy non-compliance after 14 days' notice from the Regional Director, the Regional Director could issue a complaint based on the original allegations, and the General Counsel could then file a motion for default judgment. The agreement stipulated that in such an event, the Respondent would be deemed to have admitted all allegations, waived its right to file an Answer, and could only contest whether it had defaulted on the settlement agreement.

The Regional Director notified the Respondent of its failure to provide documentary evidence of compliance, setting a deadline for remedy. The Respondent did not comply. Consequently, the Regional Director reissued an amended complaint and notice of hearing. The Respondent again failed to file an answer. After further notifications, the Acting General Counsel filed a Motion for Default Judgment with the Board. Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert A. Giannasi issued an order transferring the proceeding to the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why the motion should not be granted, to which the Respondent did not respond.

The Board, noting that the Respondent had failed to comply with the settlement agreement, found that all allegations in the complaint were true and granted the motion for default judgment. The Board made the following findings of fact:

• Jurisdiction: The Respondent is a New Jersey corporation operating a long-term care and rehabilitation center, engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and is a healthcare institution. The Union is a labor organization.
• Appropriate Unit and Certification: The Board found that maintenance employees at the Respondent's Newark facility constituted an appropriate bargaining unit and that the Union had been certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of this unit.
• Alleged Unfair Labor Practices:
  • The Union requested specific information regarding Unit employees, including health insurance, seniority, hire dates, rates of pay, employment status, and life insurance policy information.
  • The Respondent provided some of the requested information but failed and refused to furnish the life insurance policy information.
  • The Union repeatedly requested to meet and bargain with the Respondent, but the Respondent failed and refused to bargain, never responding to these requests.
  • The requested information was deemed necessary and relevant to the Union's performance of its duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative.

Based on these findings, the Board concluded that the Respondent's conduct constituted a failure and refusal to recognize and bargain collectively and in good faith with the Union, violating Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.

The Board ordered the Respondent to cease and desist from refusing to bargain and refusing to furnish requested information, and from interfering with employees' Section 7 rights. Affirmatively, the Respondent was ordered to bargain with the Union upon request, embody any understanding in a signed agreement, furnish the requested life insurance policy information, and post a Notice to Employees. Furthermore, the Board extended the certification year pursuant to Mar-Jac Poultry Co. and related precedent, with the initial period of certification commencing when the Respondent begins to bargain in good faith.

The Board's decision focused on enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement and the legal consequences of the Respondent's default. There was no separate decision issued by an Administrative Law Judge; the matter proceeded directly to the Board through a motion for default judgment.

Significant Cases Cited

• U-Bee, Ltd., 315 NLRB 667 (1994): This case established the Board's practice of granting default judgments when a respondent fails to answer a complaint, deeming the allegations admitted.
• Mar-Jac Poultry Co., 136 NLRB 785 (1962): This case is significant for its holding that the certification year should be extended when an employer unlawfully refuses to bargain, ensuring employees have a full year of representation.
• Burnett Construction Co., 149 NLRB 1419 (1964): This case affirmed the principle of extending the certification year when bargaining has been unlawfully delayed.
• Lamar Hotel, 140 NLRB 226 (1962): This case also supports the extension of the certification year in cases of unlawful refusal to bargain, ensuring the integrity of the bargaining process.

This summary was generated using Google's Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite. It could contain errors.