NLRB Cases Archive 1960 - 1995, LABOR-RELATIONS 1993-94 CCH-NLRB ¶15,404, FERRYMAN ENTERPRISES dba QUALITY HOTEL TACOMA DOME and HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 8, et al. and HERE HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND., (July 28, 1994), National Labor Relations Board, (Jul 28, 1994)

FERRYMAN ENTERPRISES dba QUALITY HOTEL TACOMA DOME and HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 8, et al. and HERE HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND.

314 NLRB No. 91.Case Nos. 19-CA-21491, -21747 and -22298. July 28, 1994 Burton Litvack, Administrative Law Judge..

Before Gould, Browning and Cohen.

Daniel Sanders, for General Counsel. Judd Lees (Williams, Kastner & Gibbs), Bellevue, Washington, for Respondent. Mel Kang (Ekman & Bohrer), Seattle, Washington, for Charging Party [1] HERE Health and Welfare Trust.

Impasse--Unilateral Changes--Employee Handbook Terms.--After an impasse had been declared, an employer violated its bargaining duty by unilaterally implementing changes to an employee handbook that involved terms and conditions of employment without affording a union an opportunity to bargain about the changes. The new terms included at-will employment, problem review, no-solicitation, visitation, cash and charge, leave of absence and vacation policy. Although the employer implemented the changes only after the impasse existed, the new work conditions had not been set forth in the employer’s final offer to the union, which rendered the new employment terms unlawful. Section 8(a)(5).

Back reference: ¶3143.221.

From Text of Board’s Decision

The Board has considered the decision and record in light of the exceptions and briefs [2] and has decided to affirm the judge’s rulings, findings, [3] and conclusions and to adopt the recommended Order.

¹	The name of this Charging Party was amended at the hearing.
²	The Respondent does not except to, and we affirm, the judge’s finding that it committed postsettlement violations of Sec. 8(a)(5) and (1) by unilaterally instituting new terms and conditions of employment involving “at will” employment, problem review, no-solicitation, visitation, cash and charge, vacation, and leaves of absence.
³	The General Counsel and Charging Party Trust Fund correctly note in their exceptions that the judge erroneously stated that the Federal district court decision and the arbitration decision involving the issues encompassed by Case 19-CA-21491 were rendered prior to the September 6, 1991 settlement agrreement in Case 19-CA-21578. Both decisions issued after the settlement agrreement: the Federal district court decision on May 26, 1992 and the arbitrator’s decision on June 15, 1992. Contrary to the contentions of both parties, however, we do not find that the judge’s error in this regard affects his decision that, under Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel Co., [1978 CCH NLRB ¶19,266] 235 NLRB 1397 (1978), the settlement agreement precludes the General Counsel from litigating the presettlement conduct alleged in the charges in Cases 19-CA-21491 and 19-CA-21747.

NLRB Cases Archive 1960 - 1995, LABOR-RELATIONS 1993-94 CCH-NLRB ¶15,404, FERRYMAN ENTERPRISES dba QUALITY HOTEL TACOMA DOME and HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 8, et al. and HERE HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND., (July 28, 1994), National Labor Relations Board, (Jul 28, 1994)

FERRYMAN ENTERPRISES dba QUALITY HOTEL TACOMA DOME and HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 8, et al. and HERE HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND.

314 NLRB No. 91.Case Nos. 19-CA-21491, -21747 and -22298. July 28, 1994 Burton Litvack, Administrative Law Judge..

Before Gould, Browning and Cohen.

Back reference: ¶3143.221.

From Text of Board’s Decision

¹	The name of this Charging Party was amended at the hearing.
²	The Respondent does not except to, and we affirm, the judge’s finding that it committed postsettlement violations of Sec. 8(a)(5) and (1) by unilaterally instituting new terms and conditions of employment involving “at will” employment, problem review, no-solicitation, visitation, cash and charge, vacation, and leaves of absence.
³	The General Counsel and Charging Party Trust Fund correctly note in their exceptions that the judge erroneously stated that the Federal district court decision and the arbitration decision involving the issues encompassed by Case 19-CA-21491 were rendered prior to the September 6, 1991 settlement agrreement in Case 19-CA-21578. Both decisions issued after the settlement agrreement: the Federal district court decision on May 26, 1992 and the arbitrator’s decision on June 15, 1992. Contrary to the contentions of both parties, however, we do not find that the judge’s error in this regard affects his decision that, under Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel Co., [1978 CCH NLRB ¶19,266] 235 NLRB 1397 (1978), the settlement agreement precludes the General Counsel from litigating the presettlement conduct alleged in the charges in Cases 19-CA-21491 and 19-CA-21747.

NLRB Cases Archive 1960 - 1995, LABOR-RELATIONS 1993-94 CCH-NLRB ¶15,404, FERRYMAN ENTERPRISES dba QUALITY HOTEL TACOMA DOME and HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 8, et al. and HERE HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND., (July 28, 1994), National Labor Relations Board, (Jul 28, 1994)

From Text of Board’s Decision

Footnotes

NLRB Cases Archive 1960 - 1995, LABOR-RELATIONS 1993-94 CCH-NLRB ¶15,404, FERRYMAN ENTERPRISES dba QUALITY HOTEL TACOMA DOME and HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 8, et al. and HERE HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND., (July 28, 1994), National Labor Relations Board, (Jul 28, 1994)

From Text of Board’s Decision

Footnotes