RECOMMENDED

DECISION
by

National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge Geoffrey Carter

On these findings of fact and conclusions of law and on the entire record, I issue the following recommended Issued the following recommended

ORDER
The Respondent, Station Casinos, Las Vegas, Nevada, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall

1. Cease and desist from

(a) Discharging or otherwise discriminating against any employee for engaging in protected concerted activities or supporting the Local Joint Executive Board of Las Vegas Culinary Workers Union, Local 226 and Bartenders Union Local 165, affiliated with Unite Here, or any other union. (b) Discharging or otherwise discriminating against any employee for filing charges or giving testimony under the Act.

(c) Maintaining and enforcing a rule on its Record of Counseling forms that states, [t]his counseling session is confidential and should only be discussed with Management or Human Resources. (d) Creating an impression among employees that their union activities are under surveillance. (e) Threatening employees not to sign Union cards. (f) Threatening employees with unspecified reprisals if they support or select the Union as their bargaining representative. (g) Threatening employees with additional work if they select the Union as their bargaining representative. (h) Threatening employees with losing benefits if they select the Union as their bargaining representative. (i) Issuing and enforcing overly broad and discriminatory rules that prohibit employees from speaking with or listening to Union supporters. (j) Asking employees to advise the Respondent of the union activities of other employees. (k) Advising employees to call the police if Union supporters refuse to leave their homes after being asked to do so. (l) Promising increased benefits and/or improved terms and conditions of employment to employees to dissuade them from supporting the Union. (m) Informing employees that it would be futile for them to support the Union as their bargaining representative.

(n) Unlawfully interrogating employees about their Union membership, activities and sympathies. (o) Unlawfully engaging in surveillance of employees union activities. (p) Threatening employees by inviting them to quit their employment because they support the Union. (q) Punishing employees by making them work alone because they support the Union. (r) Issuing and enforcing overly broad and discriminatory rules that prohibit employees who support the Union from assisting each other at work. (s) Denying work opportunities to employees because of their union activities. (t) Issuing and enforcing rules that prohibit employees from moving to another station without permission because they have engaged in union activities. (u) Imposing more onerous working conditions on employees because of their union activities. (v) Denying employees benefits in the form of open discussion at pre-shift meetings because they support the Union. (w) Issuing and enforcing overly broad and/or discriminatory rules that prohibit employees from discussing issues of common concern (including but not limited to the union organizing campaign) at preshift meetings.

(x) Issuing and enforcing overly broad and discriminatory rules that prohibit employees from soliciting for the Union during work hours. (y) Threatening employees with job loss if they support the Union as their bargaining representative. (z) Threatening employees with stricter enforcement of work rules if they select the Union as their bargaining representative. (aa) Threatening employees with closer supervision and stricter enforcement of work rules if employees select the Union as their bargaining representative. (bb) Threatening employees that it (the Respondent) will end the ability of employees to talk to their supervisors and managers if employees select the Union as their bargaining representative. (cc) Issuing and enforcing discriminatory rules that prohibit employees from engaging in union activities in the Respondents employee parking garages. (dd) Issuing and enforcing discriminatory rules that prohibit off duty employees from engaging in union activities at the Respondents facilities, including but not limited to employee parking garages. (ee) Summoning employees to the human resources office because they support the Union. (ff) Grabbing employees because they support the Union. (gg) Threatening employees with discharge if they engage in union activities.

(hh) Prohibiting off duty employees from accessing the Respondents facilities because of their union activities. (ii) Issuing and enforcing overly broad and discriminatory rules that prohibit employees from wearing Union buttons. (jj) Soliciting complaints and grievances from employees and thereby promising increased benefits and improved terms and conditions of employment if employees refrain from supporting the Union. (kk) Granting benefits to employees to dissuade them from supporting the Union. (ll) Threatening employees with unspecified reprisals if they sign Union membership cards. (mm) Threatening employees with reduced work hours because they are engaging in union activities. (nn) Threatening employees with losing the graveyard shift because they are engaging in union activities. (oo) Threatening employees with unspecified reprisals for speaking out in support of the Union. (pp) Threatening employees with adverse employment action for speaking about the Union in front of customers. (qq) Disciplining employees for engaging in protected activity in the presence of customers. (rr) Disciplining employees for engaging in protected activity at pre-shift meetings.

(ss) Threatening employees with further discipline because they support the Union. (tt) Disciplining employees for engaging in protected activity. (uu) Issuing and enforcing overly broad and discriminatory rules that prohibit employees from discussing the Union. (vv) Threatening employees that the Respondent will engage in surveillance of their union activities. (ww) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.

2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Within 14 days from the date of the Boards Order, offer Teresa Debellonia and Adelina Nunez full reinstatement to their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer exist, to substantially equivalent positions, without prejudice to their seniority or any other rights or privileges previously enjoyed. (b) Make Teresa Debellonia, Ana Galo and Adelina Nunez whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits suffered as a result of the discrimination against them in the manner set forth in the remedy section of the decision, with interest. (c) Within 14 days from the date of the Boards Order, remove from its files any references to the unlawful disciplines and discharge, and within 3 days thereafter notify Teresa Debellonia, Hilda Griffin, Jose Omar Mendoza and Adelina Nunez in writing that this has been

done and that the unlawful disciplines and/or discharge will not be used against them in any way. (d) Preserve and, within 14 days of a request, or such additional time as the Regional Director may allow for good cause shown, provide at a reasonable place designated by the Board or its agents, all payroll records, social security payment records, timecards, personnel records and reports, and all other records, including an electronic copy of such records if stored in electronic form, necessary to analyze the amount of backpay due under the terms of this Order. (e) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at its facilities in and around Las Vegas, Nevada, copies of the attached notice marked Appendix in both English and Spanish. Copies of the notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 28, after being signed by the Respondents authorized representative, shall be posted by the Respondent and maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. In addition to physical posting of paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically, such as by email, posting on an intranet or an internet site, or other electronic means, if the Respondent customarily communicates with its employees by such means. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. In the event that, during the pendency of these proceedings, the Respondent has gone out of business or closed the facilities involved in these proceedings, the Respondent shall duplicate and mail, at its own expense, a copy of the notice to all current employees and former employees employed by the Respondent at any time since February 18, 2010. (f) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file with the Regional Director a sworn certification of a responsible official on a form provided by the Region attesting to the steps that the Respondent has taken to comply. It is further ordered that the complaints are dismissed insofar as they allege violations of the Act not specifically found. Dated, Washington, D.C. September 22, 2011