Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01731/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01731-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Carpenters District Council
Intervenor
National Labor Relations Board
Respondent
Zarcon
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-1490

___________

National Labor Relations Board; *

*

Petitioner, *

*

Carpenters District Council of *

Kansas City and Vicinity, *

*

Intervenor on Appeal, *

*

v. *

*

Zarcon, Inc., *

*

Respondent. *

__________ On Petition for Review from

National Labor Relations Board.

No. 04-1731

__________ [UNPUBLISHED]

Zarcon, Inc., *

*

Petitioner, *

*

v. *

*

National Labor Relations Board; *

*

Respondent, *

*

Carpenters District Council of *

Kansas City and Vicinity, *

Appellate Case: 04-1731 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/18/2005 Entry ID: 1855960 
-2-

*

Intervenor on Appeal. *

___________

Submitted: January 10, 2005

Filed: January 18, 2005

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In this labor case, an administrative law judge (ALJ) decided Zarcon, Inc., a

drywall contractor, engaged in unfair labor practices by informing its employees it

would have union organizers removed from the jobsite by law enforcement officers,

by informing employees that an employee had been laid off because of his union

activities, by threatening to close the company if the union succeeded in organizing

its employees, and by threatening union representatives with physical violence. The

ALJ also found Zarcon unlawfully laid off one employee for his union activities, and

refused to hire nine applicants because of their union affiliation. Zarcon only filed

exceptions to the findings regarding the layoff and refusal to hire. The National

Labor Relations Board affirmed the ALJ’s findings, and ordered Zarcon to cease and

desist from the unfair labor practices, to offer the laid off employee reinstatement, to

hire the union-affiliated applicants, and to make them all whole for any loss of

earnings. 

Zarcon petitions for review arguing the Board committed error in finding

violations for refusing to hire employees, for interrogating an employee about his

union activities, and for laying off one employee. Having carefully reviewed the

record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, we conclude Zarcon’s arguments

fail. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s findings that Zarcon refused to hire

Appellate Case: 04-1731 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/18/2005 Entry ID: 1855960 
-3-

nine applicants because of their union affiliation. Contrary to Zarcon’s assertion, the

Board correctly concluded the refusal-to-hire allegation was not barred by the sixmonth statute of limitation. Further, substantial evidence supports the Board’s

finding that a Zarcon supervisor unlawfully interrogated a union applicant and that

Zarcon laid off an employee in retaliation for his union activities. 

Because we have nothing to add to the Board’s order in this fact intensive case,

we enforce the Board’s order in its entirety without additional explanation.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1731 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/18/2005 Entry ID: 1855960