Upload
dangmien
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Alejandro Ortiz, Esq.
Jamie Rucker, Esq.
Julie Ulmet, Esq.
National Labor Relations Board, Region 2
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3614
New York, New York 10278-0104
(212) 264-0300
Rachel V. See, Esq.
National Labor Relations Board
1015 Half Street SE
Washington, DC 20570
(202) 273-3848
Counsel for the Applicant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Applicant,
v. USDJ _________
15 - Misc. - ________
MCDONALD’S USA, LLC,
Respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING OBEDIENCE
TO ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
The National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or the “Applicant”), respectfully
applies to this honorable Court, pursuant to Section 11(2) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, (the “Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 161(2), for an order requiring McDonald’s USA, LLC
(“McDonald’s” or “Respondent”), to obey a subpoena duces tecum issued by the Board and duly
served on Respondent in the manner provided by law. In support of said application, upon
information and belief, Applicant respectfully shows as follows:
1. Applicant is an administrative agency created by the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151, et seq.,
and is empowered and directed to administer the provisions of the Act, including the power to
322
2
investigate unfair labor practices as defined in Section 8 of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158, and issue
complaints and hold administrative hearings as provided in Section 10 of the Act, 29 U.S.C.
§ 160.
2. Pursuant to Section 6 of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 156, the Board has issued Rules and
Regulations (the “Board’s Rules”), governing the conduct of its operations, which rules and
regulations have been duly published in the Federal Register (24 F.R. 9095), as provided for in
the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552. This Court may take judicial notice of the
Board’s Rules by virtue of the Federal Register Act, 44 U.S.C. § 1507.
3. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by Section 11(2) of the Act, 29 U.S.C.
§ 161(2), giving the District Courts jurisdiction to issue orders, upon application of the Board, to
enforce subpoenas issued by the Board.
4. Jurisdiction is also conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. § 1337, which gives the
District Courts original jurisdiction “of all suits and proceedings under any law regulating
commerce,” without regard to citizenship of the parties or the sum or value in controversy.
5. Section 11(1) of the Act authorizes the Board, in furtherance of the broad
Congressional purposes of promoting the free flow of commerce and protecting workers’
exercise of full freedom of association, to issue to any person subpoenas requiring attendance
and testimony of witnesses or production of any evidence that “relates to any matter under
investigation or in question.”
6. The Fast Food Workers’ Committee, Service Employees International Union, CTW,
CLC, Pennsylvania Workers Organizing Committee, a Project of the Fast Food Workers
Committee, Workers Organizing Committee of Chicago, Western Workers Organizing
Committee, and Los Angeles Organizing Committee (collectively, the “Charging Parties”) filed
unfair labor practice charges (the “Charges”) pursuant to Section 102.9, et seq., of the Board’s
Rules, alleging that Respondent McDonald’s, as a joint employer with the franchisee named in
each charge, violated Sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) of the Act. (29 U.S.C. §§ 158(a)(1), (3)). The
charges were filed throughout the United States, in various of the Board’s regional offices,
including regional offices located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Region 4); Chicago, Illinois
(Region 13); San Francisco and Los Angeles, California (Regions 20 and 31); Indianapolis,
Indiana (Region 25); and New York, New York (Region 2). A complete list of Charges, and the
Respondents identified in each Charge, is set forth in Appendix A. The Charges were filed and
3
amended on the dates set forth in Appendix B. The relevant regional office of the National
Labor Relations Board conducted an investigation of each Charge.
7. McDonald’s is one of the nation’s largest employers, with its U.S. restaurants
employing approximately 750,000 workers. In 2014, McDonald’s Corporation, the global entity
of which McDonald’s is a wholly-owned subsidiary, reported net income of $4.8 billion based
off of revenue of $27.4 billion, with $8.77 billion in revenue coming from its U.S. operations.
http://news.mcdonalds.com/press-releases/mcdonald-s-usa-announces-new-employee-benefit-
package-including-wage-increase-an-nyse-mcd-1185520 (last accessed September 18, 2015);
(See McDonald’s 2014 Form 10-K, attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 1, at 12.)
8. McDonald’s is in the business of franchising. (McDonald’s 2013 Franchise
Disclosure Document, attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 2.) And as it publicly states, it
expects its franchisees to adhere to specific operational requirements; the “essence” of operating
a McDonald’s franchise is “the establishment and maintenance of a close personal working
relationship with McDonald’s in the conduct of Franchisee’s McDonald’s restaurant business,
Franchisee’s accountability for the obligations contained in this Franchise, and Franchisee’s
adherence to the tenets of the McDonald’s System.” (Id.)
9. During the investigation, McDonald’s submitted a position statement to the Board in
which it described, among other topics, the role of its business consultants, also known as
operations consultants (“Operations Consultants”). (May 22, 2014 Goldsmith to Kearney letter,
attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 3, pp. 9—10.) The statement describes these consultants as
primarily responsible for administering McDonald’s formal Restaurant Operations Improvement
Process and maintaining adherence to the McDonald’s franchise system. (Id.) McDonald’s has
also described the job duties of Operations Consultants in postings seeking applicants for those
positions. (See Appl. Exh. 29, below, at MCDNLRB 033099; see also e-mail messages from
Operations Consultants produced by McDonald’s pursuant to subpoena, attached hereto as
Applicant Exhibit 4.)
10. On December 19, 2014, based on their investigations of the relevant Charges, the
Regional Directors for Regions 2, 4, 13, 20, 25, and 31 of the Board, on behalf of the General
Counsel of the Board, each issued an Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint, and
Notice of Hearing against Respondent McDonald’s, alleging that McDonald’s, as a joint
employer with the other named respondents, violated Sections 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Acts
4
(collectively, the “December 2014 Complaints”). On February 13, 2015, the Regional Director
for Region 31 issued a second Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint, and Notice
of Hearing against Respondent McDonald’s, alleging that McDonald’s, as a joint employer with
the other named respondents, violated Sections 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act (the “February 2015
Complaint”; collectively, with December 2014 Complaints, the “Complaints”). (Complaints and
affidavits of service attached hereto as Applicant Exhibits 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e, 5f, and 5g; see also
https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/fact-sheets/mcdonalds-fact-sheet (last accessed Sept. 29,
2015).)
11. On January 5, 2015, the General Counsel issued an Order transferring the December
2014 Complaints issued by the Regional Directors of Regions 4, 13, 20, 25, and 31 to Region 2.
(Order Transferring Cases to Region 2 attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 6a). On January 6,
2015, the Regional Director for Region 2 issued an Order consolidating the December 2014
Complaints. (Order Consolidating Cases (the “January 2015 Consolidation Order”) attached
hereto as Applicant Exhibit 6b). By order dated January 7, 2015, Chief Administrative Law
Judge Biblowitz assigned Administrative Law Judge Lauren Esposito (“Judge Esposito” or “ALJ
Esposito”) to hear the consolidated McDonald’s cases. (Order Assigning Trial Judge attached
hereto as Applicant Exhibit 6c.) On March 3, 2015, the General Counsel issued an order
transferring the February 2015 Complaint to Region 2. (Order Transferring Cases to Region 2
attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 6d.) On March 23, 2015, the Regional Director for Region
2 issued an Order consolidating the February 2015 Complaint with the consolidated cases
pending in Region 2, based on the December 2014 Complaints and January 2015 Consolidation
Order. (Order Consolidating Cases attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 6e.)
12. On December 31, 2014, Respondent McDonald’s filed Answers to each of the
December 2014 Complaints. On February 27, 2015, Respondent McDonald’s filed an Answer to
the February 2015 Complaint. In each Answer, McDonald’s denied the joint employer
allegations regarding it. Respondent McDonald’s also filed a Motion to Sever the consolidated
cases on about January 15, 2015. (McDonald’s’ Motion to Sever is attached hereto as Applicant
Exhibit 7.)
13. On February 9, 2015, Counsel for the General Counsel served on Respondent
McDonald’s Subpoena Duces Tecum B-1-L39K3Z (“the Subpoena”), directed to the Custodian
of Records of Respondent McDonald’s USA, LLC, 2111 McDonald’s Drive, Oak Brook, IL
5
60523, directing Respondent McDonald’s to produce certain documents at the hearing on the
Complaint, at 26 Federal Plaza, Suite 3614, New York, NY 10278, on March 30, 2015. The
subpoena requests the production of 118 categories of information, all relevant to the allegation
of joint employer, broken down into the following categories: (1) McDonald’s Organization and
System (Pars. 1 through 14); (2) Hiring Practices With Respect to Charged Franchises (Pars. 15
through 23); (3) Employee Training (Pars. 24 through 41); (4) Employee Conduct (Pars. 42
through 51); (5) Wages and Benefits (Pars. 52 through 62); (5) Hours and Assignments (Pars. 63
through 92); (6) Direct Review and Control (Pars. 93 through 108); and (7) Response to the Fast
Food Fight for $15 Campaign (Pars. 109 through 118). Service was effectuated,1 pursuant to
agreement of the parties,2 via regular first class mail to Respondent’s attorney, Willis J.
Goldsmith, Esq., Jones Day, 222 East 41st Street, New York, NY 10017. (Subpoena Duces
Tecum and cover letter attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 8a.)
14. On February 23, 2015, Respondent McDonald’s, pursuant to Section 102.31(b) of the
Board’s Rules, filed a Petition to Revoke the Subpoena (the “Petition to Revoke”), amended on
about March 24, 2015. (Petition to Revoke and Amended Petition attached hereto as Applicant
Exhibits 9a and 9b.) In its Petition to Revoke, McDonald’s said there were about 240 custodians
located throughout the country for whom McDonalds would have to review e-mail or non-email
ESI (“electronically stored information”) to respond to the Subpoena. (Applicant Exhibit 9a, p.
20.) Further, McDonald’s estimated the costs of reviewing and producing the requested ESI and
argued complying with the Subpoena would be unduly burdensome under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(b)(2)(C) and the Sedona Principles. (Applicant Exhibit 9a, p. 17–22).
15. On March 3, 2015, ALJ Esposito issued a Case Management Order (the “Case
Management Order”). (Case Management Order attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 10.) The
Case Management Order, inter alia, set dates for the administrative hearing to open on March
30, 2015, and continue on May 11, 2015, and additional dates thereafter.
16. On March 5, 2015, counsel for the General Counsel filed an Opposition to the
Petition to Revoke the Subpoena (the “Opposition to Petition to Revoke”). In the Opposition to
the Petition to Revoke, counsel for the General Counsel noted that he had made various
1 McDonald’s admitted it received the subpoena by mail on February 17, 2015. (Applicant Exhibit 9a (Petition to
Revoke, p. 7).) 2 Counsel for McDonald’s agreed to accept service on behalf of McDonald’s via a February 9, 2015 email.
(February 9, 2014 Goldsmith to Rucker email attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 8b.)
6
unsuccessful attempts to confer with counsel for McDonald’s in an effort to reduce the scope of
McDonald’s’ search by, inter alia, reducing the number of relevant custodians, improving
McDonald’s’ search methodologies, and the use of filtering tools prior to attorney review, all
issues that should be discussed between the parties, as envisioned by both the Federal Rules and
the Sedona Principles. (Applicant Exhibit 11 p. 10.) General Counsel pointed out that through
discussion it might be possible to reduce the document volume and hence the burden on
McDonald’s (Id., at p. 10-11.).
17. On March 19, 2015, ALJ Esposito issued an Order Denying the Petition to Revoke
(the “Order Denying Petition to Revoke”). (Order Denying Petition to Revoke attached hereto as
Applicant Exhibit 12.) The ALJ denied the Petition to Revoke in its entirety and directed the
parties to meet and confer in good faith beginning on March 26, 2015. (Applicant Exhibit 12, p.
11.) The ALJ observed that determinations of burdensomeness were “premature, because the
parties have yet to even begin the process of meaningfully conferring regarding the [ESI] sought
by the Subpoena.” (Id., p. 10-11.) In particular, she noted, “Without even the barest attempt to
engage in meaningful dialogue which could limit the scope of production, the various statements
and calculations provided by [McDonald’s] in its Petition to Revoke regarding the purported cost
of producing electronically stored information in response to the Subpoena have no probative
value whatsoever.” (Id., p. 11.)
18. On about March 24, 2015, McDonald’s counsel submitted a motion to amend its
petition to revoke the Subpoena, the most notable change of which was to further reduce, by a
factor of about 4, its estimate of the cost of searching for ESI. (Applicant Exhibit 9b.)
19. On March 26, 2015, counsel for McDonald’s and for the General Counsel met and
conferred regarding McDonald’s’ response to the subpoena, especially the production of ESI (the
“March 26 Meet and Confer”). (See (March 27, 2015 Rucker to Goldsmith letter attached hereto
as Applicant Exhibit 13; see also Applicant Exhibit 15 (Hearing Transcript, Vol. I), at 74:13.) At
this meeting, McDonald’s disclosed the names and/or job titles of 28 custodians it believed had
documents responsive to the Subpoena. (See Appl. Exh. 13.) It did not disclose the names and
job titles of the remaining 212 custodians it previously cited in its Petition to Revoke. (See id.)
20. In a March 27, 2015 letter, the General Counsel followed up on discussion at the
March 26 Meet and Confer about McDonald’s’ initial search for ESI responsive to the Subpoena.
(Applicant Exhibit 13.) In that letter, the General Counsel requested “(1) the list of the 240
7
custodians (by name and job title) you initially identified as potentially possessing relevant
evidence and (2) the organizational chart asked for in paragraph one of the General Counsel’s
subpoena.” (Id.)
21. In a March 29, 2015 letter responding to the March 27, 2015 letter, counsel for
McDonald’s, instead of providing the General Counsel with the list of the 240 custodians and the
organizational chart, again identified the twenty-eight (28) custodians who he “believe[s] are
most likely to possess documents and ESI responsive [to the McDonald’s Subpoena].” Of those
28 custodians, only 6 were Operations Consultants responsible for a metropolitan area covering a
charged franchisee. (March 29, 2015 Goldsmith to Rucker Letter attached hereto as Applicant
Exhibit 14.)
22. The unfair labor practice hearing before ALJ Esposito opened on March 30, 2015, for
the purpose of addressing issues such as outstanding petitions to revoke and subpoena
compliance. At this hearing, counsel for McDonald’s acknowledged the General Counsel’s
request for the names and job titles of the remaining 212 custodians and, while not providing that
information, clarified that “we are not limiting the search to the 28 people whose names we have
provided to the General Counsel. It’s a start.” (Relevant portions of administrative transcript
(pages 74–86) attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 15.)
23. On April 1, 2015, the General Counsel sent a letter to McDonald’s regarding the ESI
production. In the letter, General Counsel again asked McDonald’s to disclose its remaining
custodians and identified, by Subpoena paragraph, the documents he believed McDonald’s could
readily identify and produce, such as training manuals it provides franchisees. (April 1, 2015
Letter from Rucker to Goldsmith attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 16.) McDonald’s
responded in an April 6, 2015 letter. (April 6, 2015 Goldsmith to Rucker Letter attached hereto
as Applicant Exhibit 17.) In the letter, McDonald’s again refused to disclose the names and job
titles of its 212 remaining custodians, asserting that such a request “is little more than an
interrogatory.” (Id. at 3.)
24. On April 8, 2015, the General Counsel and McDonald’s participated in a second
meet-and-confer session. On April 15, 2015, General Counsel sent McDonald’s a letter
following up on this meeting, acknowledging receipt of some documents but noting the absence
of the governing franchise agreements and other documents he expected to receive. (April 15,
2015 Rucker to Davis Letter attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 18.) McDonald’s responded in
8
an April 16, 2015 email message, saying documents would be produced on a “rolling basis.”
(April 16, 2015 Goldsmith to Rucker email attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 19.)
25. On April 9, 2015, the ALJ approved a Stipulated Protective Order, and on April 27,
2015, approved a revised Stipulated Protective Order (the “Protective Order”). (April 9, 2015
Stipulated Protective Order attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 20a; April 27, 2015 Stipulated
Protective Order attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 20b.) The Protective Order allows parties
to designate sensitive information “confidential” or “highly confidential—attorney’s eyes only,”
provides express instructions on how parties are to handle such material, and includes a
procedure for any breaches of that order.
26. On April 30, 2015, the General Counsel sent a letter to McDonald’s regarding the
ESI production. (April 30, 2015 Rucker to Goldsmith Letter attached hereto as Applicant
Exhibit 21.) In that letter, General Counsel asked for estimated dates by which McDonald’s
would complete ESI production from the 28 custodians it previously disclosed and offered to
consider limiting the scope of the ESI demanded by the Subpoena once he reviewed that
production, including the data sources reviewed and search methods used. (Id.) McDonald’s
responded in a letter of even date. (April 30, 2015 Goldsmith to Rucker Letter attached hereto as
Applicant Exhibit 22.) In the letter, McDonald’s detailed its efforts to comply with the
Subpoena. It said it intended to focus on ESI from the 28 previously identified custodians, that it
anticipated making rolling productions every 7–10 days, but concluded that “the end date for
overall compliance, or even compliance with particular aspects of the subpoena, is unknowable.”
(Id.)
27. On May 13, 2015, the General Counsel sent a letter to McDonald’s noting that many
of the documents provided by McDonald’s in response to the Subpoena “contain significant
redactions of unprivileged material” and requesting that McDonald’s “promptly provide
unredacted versions of those documents and that future productions comply with the subpoena
instructions.” (May 13, 2015 Ortiz to Goldsmith letter attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 23.)
In a May 28, 2015 email, McDonald’s indicated that it would respond to this letter at the next
scheduled hearing before the ALJ. (May 28, 2015 Davis to Ortiz email attached hereto as
Applicant Exhibit 24.)
28. On May 19, 2015, ALJ Esposito issued an Order Adjourning Hearing from May 26,
2015 and Establishing Procedures for the Production of Information Pursuant to Subpoena (the
9
“May 19 Order”). (May 19 Order attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 25.) In the May 19
Order, ALJ Esposito set dates for a series of conferences to discuss the production of documents
and ESI and set a new date of October 5, 2015 for continuation of the administrative hearing.
She also said she anticipated that by June 2 McDonald’s would be prepared to establish a date to
complete production and that she hoped by June 2 McDonald’s would be done with ESI
production from the 28 previously identified custodians.
29. On June 1, 2015, McDonald’s sent the General Counsel a letter setting forth the status
of its compliance with the McDonald’s Subpoena. (June 1, 2015 Goldsmith to Rucker letter
attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 26.) In this letter, McDonald’s said it expected to complete
ESI production from the 28 custodians by July 1, 2015. (Id. at 1.) It also said it had no
documents responsive to a number of Subpoena paragraphs, including Nos. 17, 22, 45, 65, and
68–74. (Id.)
30. On June 2, 2015, McDonald’s and the General Counsel participated in a conference
before ALJ Esposito. (Relevant portions of the transcript (pp. 164–202) attached hereto as
Applicant Exhibit 27.) Two issues related to compliance with the subpoena were discussed:
(1) the General Counsel’s request for a list of the 240 custodians and (2) McDonald’s redaction
of responsive documents. In that hearing, the ALJ ordered McDonald’s to provide to the
General Counsel by June 15, 2015, the job descriptions for the McDonald’s employees who had
been identified in McDonald’s’ February 23, 2015 list of 240 custodians likely to possess
relevant information. (Applicant Ex. 27, at 202:12.) The ALJ also ordered the parties to provide
her with statements of their position on the redaction issue by June 9, 2015. (Applicant Ex. 27,
at 169:7.)
31. On June 12, 2015, McDonald’s produced certain responsive documents to the
General Counsel, and, instead of producing the job descriptions for the 240 custodians,
McDonald’s produced job postings for approximately 44 jobs. (See June 23, 2015 Transcript at
312:4–313:14, attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 28.) Among those were job postings for
Operations/Field Consultants and Human Resources Consultants. (Copies of the Operations
Consultants and Human Resource Consultant postings are attached hereto as Applicant Exhibits
29 and 30, respectively.)
32. On June 9, 2015, General Counsel filed a Motion to Compel Production of
Unredacted Documents (the “June 9 Filing”). On the same date, McDonald’s filed a Statement
10
Regarding Redaction of Certain Documents Produced in Response to Subpoenas (the “June 9
Statement”). On June 15, 2015, ALJ Esposito issued an Order Requiring McDonald’s USA,
LLC to Produce Unredacted Documents (the “June 15 Order”). (June 9, 2015 Filing, June 9,
2015 Statement, and June 15 Order attached hereto as Applicant Exhibits 31, 32, and 33.)
33. On June 22, 2015, McDonald’s sent a letter to ALJ Esposito stating that McDonald’s
would not comply with the June 15 Order “[a]bsent a federal court order”. (June 22, 2015
Goldsmith to ALJ Esposito Letter attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 34.)
34. On June 22, 2015, General Counsel sent a letter to McDonald’s regarding the status
of McDonald’s’ compliance with the McDonald’s Subpoena. (June 22, 2015 Rucker to
Goldsmith Letter attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 35.) In that letter, the General Counsel
stated his position that McDonald’s should expand its set of custodians for purposes of the ESI
searches conducted in response to the Subpoena, in addition to the unilaterally selected 28.
Specifically, General Counsel identified approximately 52 additional custodians whose records
should be reviewed: twenty-three Business or Operations Consultants, seven VPs GM [General
Managers], ten VPs of QSC [Quality, Service, and Cleanliness], one of whom also served as a
VP GM, seven Directors of Operations, Field Services, and six additional personnel who,
because of their positions, duties, and anticipated knowledge, warranted inclusion as potential
custodians. (Id., at p. 2—4; PDF copies of LinkedIn websites for Heather Smedstad, John
Kujawa, and Troy Brethauer, printed on September 28, 2015, attached hereto as Applicant
Exhibits 36, 37, and 38.) In addition, based on the General Counsel’s review of the job postings
provided by McDonald’s, the General Counsel also took the position that the Human Resources
Consultants assigned to each one or more of the Respondent franchisees during the time period
should be included as relevant ESI custodians, an approximate number being 6, for a total of 58
additional custodians.3 In this letter, the General Counsel also registered his opposition to
McDonald’s’ position that it could not produce some documents because it lacked “possession,
custody, or control” over them. These include documents responsive to Subpoena paragraphs
17, 19, 21-22, 45, 65, and 69–74. (See June 1, 2015 Goldsmith to Rucker letter, attached hereto
as Applicant Exhibit 39.) In the General Counsel’s view, other documents provided by
McDonald’s undermine McDonald’s’ position and show that McDonald’s does have access to
3 Documents provided by McDonald’s state that Human Resources Consultants are “the first line of support for the
McDonald’s System, responsible for consulting on People issues and initiatives to Restaurant employees, Operations
Staff, Franchise Owners, and Field HR.” (Exh. 30 at MCDNLRB033059.)
11
documents responsive to Subpoena paragraphs 17, 19, 21–22, 45, 65, and 69–74. (MDP Module
1, Shift Management, attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 40; QSC Playbook, attached hereto as
Applicant Exhibit 41; Exhibit 3, pp. 9–10; Franke Catalog excerpt, attached hereto as Exhibit 42;
documents produced by McDonald’s pursuant to subpoena and describing the Hiring to Win
program are attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 44.)
35. On June 23, 2015, counsel for McDonald’s and for the General Counsel participated
in a hearing before ALJ Esposito. (Relevant portions of the administrative transcript for June 23
and July 14, 2015 are attached hereto as Applicant Exhibit 43.) During the hearing the parties
discussed McDonald’s’ position that it cannot produce certain documents because it lacked
“possession, custody, or control” over those documents. (Exh. 43 at 352–356.) The General
Counsel took the position that McDonald’s does have access to these reports, whereas
McDonald’s asserted it “might have [access to the] data” underlying the reports but not the
reports and thus that it had no obligation to create the reports. The parties also discussed the
issue of the number of custodians whose material McDonald’s was searching for responsive ESI.
Counsel for McDonald’s stated that it would be willing to add “six or seven” additional
custodians to its unilaterally-selected list of twenty-eight custodians, but not more. (Id. at
319:15, 309:23–310:1, and 315:15–319:23.) Following argument, McDonald’s affirmatively
stated that it would not comply with an order by the ALJ requiring it to search for and produce
ESI from additional custodians. (Id. at 347:5–18.)
36. The failure of Respondent McDonald’s to comply with the subpoenas constitutes
contumacious conduct within the meaning of Section 11(2) of the Act 29 U.S.C. § 161(2) which
has impeded and continues to impede the Board’s prosecution of the unfair labor practice
charges hereinabove.
37. No previous application has been made for relief sought herein.
WHEREFORE, the Applicant, the National Labor Relations Board, respectfully prays:
(a) That an Order to Show Cause issue forthwith directing Respondent McDonald’s to
appear before this Court on a date certain to be fixed in said Order, and that it show cause, if
there be any, why an Order should not issue directing Respondents to produce the requested
documents to the Applicant at a time designated by the Counsel for the General Counsel.
12
(b) That upon return of the Order to Show Cause, an Order issue enforcing the Subpoena
directed to McDonald’s USA, LLC, including specific directives that McDonald’s:
1. Search for and produce documents and ESI in response to Subpoena paragraphs 11, 13–
17, 23, 39–40, 48–51, 56–59, 75–76, 78–83, 91, 93–100, and 102–118, either
(a) From all the following custodians:
(i) Operations Consultants A.J. Block, Carlos Canseco, Anthony Cayce,
Rosita Cazares, Sammy Coker, Raynah D’Souza, Marco Garcia, Mary Jo
Gogola, Charles Gonsowski, Ken Greene, Ken Knowlton, Deb Krolak,
Barbara Long, Stephen Monahan, Tait Okayama, Maria Pechs,Alex Pina,
Dean Przybyszweski, Yokasta Rodrigues, Latherin Thomas, Amanda
Washington, Dora Youssef, and Ronald Zarek;
(ii) McDonald’s executives who oversee those Operations Consultants,
specifically VP General Managers Jim Carras, Myra Doria, Mwaffak
Kanjkee, Ofelia Melendrez-Kumpf, Gino Potesta, Derrick Pratt, and
Mason Smoot; VPs of QSC Ramzi Awad, Alvaro Bonta, Dan Gehret,
Francisco Gonzalez, Cedric Jones, Steve Kerley, William “Bill”
McKernan, Marcos Quesada, Jorge Salvat, and Medy Valenzuela; and
Directors of Operations Matt Ajayi, David Garcia, Bridgette Hernandez,
Bill Mitchell, Ruben Reyes, Jim Schugars, and Michelle Wherry;
(iii) Human Resources Consultant Manuel Abreu, Lori Cramer, Lucia
Lara,Thuy Pham, Nicole Saba, and Starla Spencer; and
(iv) Six additional McDonald’s executives identified by the General Counsel,
viz., Senior VP of Human Resources Heather Smedstad, VP for USA
Franchising John Kujawa, Director of Operations for U.S. Business
Integration Jeff Wayman, U.S. Vice President for Information Technology
Patrick Phalen, Operations Insights Director Michael Cramer, and Senior
Director of US Operations-Execution Scott Schwindt;
OR, if the Court deems further limitations appropriate at this juncture,
(b) From the following sample set of custodians:
13
(i) Operations Consultants assigned to the charged New York franchisees,
namely A.J. Block, Ken Greene, Ken Knowlton, Barbara Long, Stephen
Monahan, and Yokasta Rodrigues;
(ii) McDonald’s executives who oversee those Operations Consultants,
specifically VP GM Mwaffak Kanjkee, VP GM Mason Smoot, VP of
QSC Steve Kerley, VP of QSC Marcos Quesada, Director of Operations
David Garcia, and Director of Operations Bridgette Hernandez;
(iii) New York Region Human Resources Consultant Manuel Abreu; and
(iv) Six additional McDonald’s executives identified by the General Counsel,
viz., Operations Insights Director Michael Cramer, VP for USA
Franchising John Kujawa, U.S. Vice President for Information
Technology Patrick Phalen, Senior VP of Human Resources Heather
Smedstad, Senior Director of US Operations-Execution Scott Schwindt,
and Director of Operations for U.S. Business Integration Jeff Wayman;
and
(v) Following the production of responsive documents and ESI for the
custodians mentioned in sub-paragraphs 1.(b)(i)– (iii) above, the Court
determine whether McDonald’s should produce responsive documents and
ESI from their regional counterparts relating to the charged franchisees in
Chicago, IL; Indianapolis, IN; Philadelphia, PA; and Sacramento and Los
Angeles, CA as identified in subparagraphs 1.(a)(i)–(iii) above;
2. Provide the NLRB with unredacted versions of all documents it has previously produced
redacted for purported non-responsiveness, lack of relevance, inclusion of proprietary
financial information, or other than assertion of attorney-client, work-product, or similar
legally recognized privilege;
3. Cease redacting documents it produces pursuant to subpoena except as necessary to protect
attorney-client, work-product, or similar legally recognized privilege;
14
4. Answer Subpoena paragraphs 17, 19, 21, 22, and 45 of the Subpoena by producing (i) Hiring
to Win documents and ESI from Aon and (ii) forms and other documents it provides to its
franchisees through Franke; and
5. Produce reports responsive to paragraphs 65 and 69–74 of the Subpoena, including the Daily
Activity Report, the All Hours VLH vs. Schedule (a/k/a Labor Pre-Review) report, LAB
Report, Projected LAB Report, Fixed Labor Analysis report, All Hours Actual Review
Review (a/k/a Labor Post Review) report, Crew Staffing Budget Analysis Report, and
Manager Schedule Violations Report for the charged franchisees covering the periods of June
and December 2012, February and August 2013, and April and October 2014.
Dated at New York, New York
This ___day of September 2015.
_________________________________
Alejandro Ortiz, Esq.
Jamie Rucker, Esq.
Julie Ulmet, Esq.
National Labor Relations Board, Region 2
26 Federal Plaza, Suite 3614
New York, NY 10278
(212) 264-0300
Rachel V. See, Esq.
National Labor Relations Board
1015 Half Street SE
Washington, DC 20570
(202) 273-3848
Counsel for the Applicant
/s/ Jamie Rucker
30
15
APPENDIX A
CASE NUMBER RESPONDENTS IDENTIFIED IN CHARGE
02-CA-093893
McDonald’s and McDonald’s located at 220 West 42nd Street, New
York, NY, whose correct name is Lewis Foods of 42nd
Street, LLC
(hereinafter, “Lewis Foods”)
02-CA-098662 McDonald’s and James R Lewis d/b/a, Lewis Foods of 42nd Street, LLC,
whose correct name is Lewis Foods of 42nd
Street, LLC (hereinafter,
“Lewis Foods”)
02-CA-093895
McDonald’s and McDonald’s located at 1188 6th Avenue New York,
NY 10036, whose correct name is AJD, Inc. (hereinafter, “AJD”)
02-CA-097827 McDonald’s and Elaine Diekmann d/b/a Bea & AJD, whose correct
name is AJD, Inc. (hereinafter, “AJD”)
02-CA-093927
McDonald’s and McDonald's located at 280 Madison Avenue, New
York, NY 10016, whose correct name is John C Food Corp. (hereinafter,
“John C Food”)
02-CA-098659 McDonald’s and Richard R. Cisneros d/b/a John C. Food Corp., whose
correct name is John C Food Corp (hereinafter, “John C Food”)
02-CA-094224
McDonald’s and McDonald’s located at 1651 Broadway, New York, NY
10019, whose correct name is 18884 Food Corporation (hereinafter,
“18884 Food”)
02-CA-098676 McDonald’s and Linda Dunham d/b/a 18884 Food Corp. (or Dunham
Management Corp.), whose correct name is 18884 Food Corporation
(hereinafter, “18884 Food”)
02-CA-094679
McDonald’s and McDonald's located at 14 East 47th Street. New York,
NY 10017, whose correct name is 14 East 47th
Street, LLC (hereinafter,
“14 E. 47th St.”)
02-CA-098604 McDonald’s and Ninosca Paulino d/b/a 14 East 47th Street, LLC, whose
correct name 14 East 47th
Street, LLC (hereinafter, “14 E. 47th St.”)
02-CA-097305 McDonald’s and Atlantic Avenue, LLC, whose correct name is 840
Atlantic Ave., LLC (hereinafter, “840 Atlantic Ave.”)
16
02-CA-098009 McDonald’s and Bruce Colley, whose correct name is McConner Street
Holding, LLC (hereinafter, “McConner”)
02-CA-103384 McDonald’s and Bruce Colley, whose correct name is McConner Street
Holding, LLC (hereinafter, “McConner”)
02-CA-103726 McDonald’s and Bruce Colley, whose correct name is Mic-Eastchester,
LLC (hereinafter, “Mic-Eastchester”)
02-CA-103771
02-CA-112282
McDonald’s and Ninosca Paulino, whose correct name is 1531 Fulton
St., LLC (hereinafter, “1531 Fulton St.)
02-CA-106094 McDonald’s and Bruce Colley, whose correct name is Bruce C. Limited
Partnership (hereinafter, “Bruce C.”)
04-CA-125567
04-CA-129783
04-CA-133621
McDonald’s and Jo-Dan Madalisse, LTD, LLC (hereinafter, “Jo-Dan”)
13-CA-106490 McDonald’s and Karavites Restaurants 11102, LLC (hereinafter,
“Karavites 11102”)
13-CA-106491 McDonald’s and Karavites Restaurants 26, Inc. (hereinafter, “Karavites
26”)
13-CA-106493 McDonald’s and RMC Loop Enterprises, LLC (hereinafter, “RMC
Loop”)
13-CA-107668
13-CA-113837
McDonald’s and Wright Management, Inc. (hereinafter, “Wright”)
13-CA-115647
13-CA-119015
13-CA-123916
13-CA-124813
13-CA-131440
McDonald’s and V. Oviedo, Inc. (hereinafter, “V. Oveido”)
13-CA-117083
13-CA-118691
13-CA-121759
McDonald’s and McDonald’s Restaurants of Illinois, Inc. (hereinafter,
“McD Illinois”)
13-CA-118690 McDonald’s and Lofton & Lofton Management V, Inc. (hereinafter,
“Lofton”)
13-CA-123699
13-CA-129771
McDonald’s and K. Mark Enterprises, LLC. (hereinafter, “K. Mark”)
17
13-CA-124213 McDonald’s and Nornat, Inc. (hereinafter, “Nornat”)
13-CA-124812 McDonald’s and Karavites Restaurant 5895, Inc. (hereinafter, “Karavites
5895”)
13-CA-129709 McDonald’s and Taylor & Malone Management (hereinafter, “Taylor &
Malone”)
13-CA-131141 McDonald’s and RMC Enterprises, LLC (hereinafter, “RMC”)
13-CA-131143 McDonald’s and Karavites Restaurant 6676, LLC (hereinafter,
“Karavites 6676”)
13-CA-131145
20-CA-132103
McDonald’s and Topaz Management, Inc. (hereinafter, “Topaz”)
McDonald’s and MaZT, Inc. (hereinafter, “MaZT”)
20-CA-135947 McDonald’s and MaZT
20-CA-135979 McDonald’s and MaZT
20-CA-137264 McDonald’s and MaZT
25-CA-114819 McDonald’s and Faith Corporation of Indianapolis (hereinafter, “Faith”)
25-CA-114915 McDonald’s and Faith
25-CA-130734 McDonald’s and Faith
25-CA-130746 McDonald’s and Faith
31-CA-127447 McDonald’s and D. Bailey Management Co. (hereinafter, “Bailey”)
31-CA-130085 McDonald’s and Bailey
31-CA-130090 McDonald’s and Bailey
31-CA-132489 McDonald’s and Bailey
31-CA-135529 McDonald’s and Bailey
31-CA-135590 McDonald’s and Bailey
31-CA-129982 McDonald’s and 2Mangas Inc. (hereinafter, “2Mangas”)
31-CA-134237 McDonald’s and 2Mangas
31-CA-128483 McDonald’s and Sanders-Clark & Co. (hereinafter, “Sanders”)
31-CA-129027 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-133117 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-129024 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-130239 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-131697 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-132913 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-132915 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-134478 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-134474 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-134478 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-134479 McDonald’s and Sanders
18
31-CA-134480 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-134514 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-135729 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-137102 McDonald’s and Sanders
31-CA-137150 McDonald’s and Sanders
19
APPENDIX B
Case No. Amendment Charging
Party or
Parties
Respondents Date Filed Date Served
02-CA-
093893
FFWC McDonald’s and Lewis
Foods
November
28, 2012
November
29, 2012
02-CA-
093895
FFWC McDonald’s and
AJD November
28, 2012
November
29, 2012
02-CA-
093895
First
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and AJD December
4, 2012
December
12, 2012
02-CA-
093927
FFWC McDonald’s and John
C Food
November
29, 2012
November
30, 2012
02-CA-
094224
FFWC McDonald’s and 18884
Food December
4, 2012
December 5,
2012
02-CA-
094679
FFWC McDonald’s and 14 E.
47th St. December
11, 2012
December
12, 2012
02-CA-
097305
FFWC McDonald’s and 840
Atlantic Ave. January 30
2013
January 30
2013
02-CA-
097305
First
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and 840
Atlantic Ave. February
20, 2013
February 21,
2013
02-CA-
097827
FFWC McDonald’s and AJD February 6,
2013
February 7,
2013
02-CA-
097827
First
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and AJD February
20, 2013
February 20,
2013
02-CA-
097827
Second
Amended
FFWC/
SEIU
McDonald’s and AJD April 30,
2014
April 30,
2014
02-CA-
098009
FFWC McDonald’s and
McConner February 8,
2013
February 11,
2013
02-CA-
098009
First
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and
McConner February
20, 2013
February 21,
2013
02-CA-
098009
Second
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and
McConner June 14,
2013
June 19,
2013
02-CA-
098604
FFWC McDonald’s and 14 E.
47th St. February
15, 2013
February 20,
2013
20
02-CA-
098659
FFWC McDonald’s and John
C Food February
15, 2013
February 20,
2013
02-CA-
098662
FFWC McDonald’s and Lewis
Foods February
15, 2013
February 20,
2013
02-CA-
098676
FFWC McDonald’s and 18884
Food February
15, 2013
February 20,
2013
02-CA-
103384
FFWC McDonald’s and
McConner April 23,
2013
April 23,
2013
02-CA-
103384
First
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and
McConner June 25,
2013
July 1, 2013
02-CA-
103726
FFWC McDonald’s and Mic-
Eastchester April 25,
2013
April 26,
2013
02-CA-
103771
FFWC McDonald’s and 1531
Fulton St. April 26,
2013
April 26,
2013
02-CA-
106094
FFWC McDonald’s and Bruce
C. May 29,
2013
May 30,
2013
02-CA-
106094
First
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and Bruce
C. July 11,
2013
July 15, 2013
02-CA-
106094
Second
Amended
FFWC McDonald’s and Bruce
C. September
11, 2013
September
13, 2013
02-CA-
112282
FFWC McDonald’s and 1531
Fulton St. August 29,
2013
August 30,
2013
04-CA-
125567
PWOC McDonald’s and Jo-
Dan March 31,
2014
April 1, 2014
04-CA-
125567
First
Amended
PWOC McDonald’s and Jo-
Dan May 8, 2014 May 8, 2014
04-CA-
125567
Second
Amended
PWOC McDonald’s and Jo-
Dan May 30,
2014
June 2, 2014
04-CA-
125567
Third
Amended
PWOC McDonald’s and Jo-
Dan Dec. 5,
2014
Dec. 8, 2014
04-CA-
129783
PWOC McDonald’s and Jo-
Dan June 2, 2014 June 3, 2014
04-CA-
133621
PWOC McDonald’s and Jo-
Dan July 29,
2014
July 30, 2014
21
13-CA-
106490
WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 11102
June 4, 2013 June 5, 2013
13-CA-
106490
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 11102
Sept 4, 2013 Sept 5, 2013
13-CA-
106490
Second WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 11102
Feb 4, 2014 Feb 5, 2014
13-CA-
106491
WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 26
June 4, 2013 June 5, 2013
13-CA-
106491
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 26
Sept 4, 2013 Sept 5, 2013
13-CA-
106491
Second WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 26
Feb 4, 2014 Feb 5, 2014
13-CA-
106493
WOCC McDonald’s and RMC
Loop
June 4, 2013 June 5, 2013
13- CA-
106493
First WOCC McDonald’s and RMC
Loop
Sept 4, 2013 Sept 5, 2013
13- CA-
106493
Second WOCC McDonald’s and RMC
Loop
Feb 4, 2014 Feb 5, 2014
13-CA-
107668
WOCC McDonald’s and
Wright
June 20,
2013
June 21,
2013
13-CA-
107668
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Wright
Sept 4, 2013 Sept 5, 2013
13-CA-
107668
Second WOCC McDonald’s and
Wright
Feb 4, 2014 Feb 5, 2014
13-CA-
113837
WOCC McDonald’s and
Wright
Sept 20,
2013
Sept 23,
2013
13-CA-
113837
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Wright
Dec 12,
2014
Dec 17, 2014
22
13-CA-
115647
WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Oct 25,
2013
Oct 25, 2013
13-CA-
115647
First WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Dec 11,
2013
Dec 12, 2013
13-CA-
115647
Second WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Jan 31, 2014 Jan 31, 2014
13-CA-
117083
WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Nov 14,
2013
Nov 15, 2013
13-CA-
117083
First WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Feb 4, 2014 Feb 5, 2014
13-CA-
117083
Second WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Mar 31,
2104
Mar 31, 2014
13-CA-
118690
WOCC McDonald’s and
Lofton
Dec 10,
2013
Dec 11, 2013
13-CA-
118691
WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Dec 10,
2013
Dec 11, 2013
13-CA-
119015
WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Dec 13,
2013
Dec 17, 2013
13-CA-
119015
First WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Jan 31, 2014 Feb 3, 2014
13-CA-
121759
WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Feb 2, 2014 Feb 4, 2014
13-CA-
121759
First WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Mar 31,
2014
Mar 31, 2014
13-CA-
121759
Second WOCC McDonald’s and McD
Illinois
Apr 29,
2014
Apr 30 2014
13-CA-
123699
WOCC McDonald’s and K.
Mark
Mar 4, 2013 Mar 5, 2014
13-CA-
123699
First WOCC McDonald’s and K.
Mark
May 19,
2013
May 19,
2014
23
13-CA-
123916
WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Mar 6, 2014 Mar 7, 2014
13-CA-
123916
First WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
May 29,
2014
May 30,
2014
13-CA-
124213
WOCC McDonald’s and
Nornat
Mar 11,
2014
Mar 11, 2014
13-CA-
124213
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Nornat
Apr 28,
2014
Apr 28 2014
13-CA-
124213
Second WOCC McDonald’s and
Nornat
Jun 4, 2014 Jun 4, 2014
13-CA-
124812
WOCC
McDonald’s and
Karavites 5895
Mar 19,
2014
Mar 20, 2014
13-CA-
124812
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Karavites 5895
Jun 3, 2014 Jun 4, 2014
13-CA-
124813
WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Mar 19,
2014
Mar 20, 2014
13-CA-
124813
First WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Jun 3, 2014 Jun 3, 2014
13-CA-
129709
WOCC McDonald’s and
Taylor
May 30,
2014
Jun 2, 2014
13-CA-
129709
First WOCC McDonald’s and
Taylor
Jun 6, 2014 Jun 9, 2014
13-CA-
129709
Second WOCC McDonald’s and
Taylor
July 18,
2014
July 21, 2014
13-CA-
129709
Third WOCC McDonald’s and
Taylor
Oct 30 2014 Oct 30, 2014
13-CA-
129771
WOCC McDonald’s and K.
Mark
May 30,
2014
June 2, 2014
13-CA-
129771
First WOCC McDonald’s and K.
Mark
Aug 29,
2014
Sept 2, 2014
13-CA-
131141
WOCC McDonald’s and RMC June 19,
2014
June 19,2014
13-CA- WOCC McDonald’s and June 19, June 20,
24
131143 Karavites 6676 2014 2014
13-CA-
131145
WOCC McDonald’s and Topaz June 19,
2014
June 20,
2014
13-CA-
131440
WOCC McDonald’s and V.
Oveido
Jun 24,
2014
Jun 25, 2014
20-CA-
132103
WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT July 1, 2014 July 3, 2014
20-CA-
132103
First WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT July 10,
2014
July 10, 2014
20-CA-
132103
Second WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Sept. 23,
2014
Sept. 24,
2014
20-CA-
132103
Third WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Dec. 8,
2014
Dec. 9, 2014
20-CA-
135947
WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Sept. 3,
2014
Sept. 4, 2014
20-CA-
125947
First WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Dec. 8,
2014
Dec. 10,
2014
20-CA-
135979
WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Sept. 3,
2014
Sept. 4, 2014
20-CA-
135979
First WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Dec. 8,
2014
Dec. 9, 2014
20-CA-
137264
WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Sept. 22,
2014
Sept. 23,
2014
20-CA-
137264
First WWOC McDonald’s and MaZT Dec. 8,
2014
Dec. 9, 2014
25-CA-
114819
WOCC McDonald’s and Faith Oct. 4, 2013 Oct. 18, 2013
25-CA-
114915
WOCC McDonald’s and Faith Oct. 4, 2013 Oct. 18, 2013
25-CA-
130734
WOCC McDonald’s and Faith June 13,
2014
June 13,
2014
25-CA-
130746
WOCC McDonald’s and Faith June 13,
2014
June 13,
2014
25
31-CA-
127447
LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey April 25,
2014
April 28,
20144
31-CA-
127447
First LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey July 9, 2014 July 11, 2014
31-CA-
127447
Second LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey Aug. 19,
2014
Aug. 22,
2014
31-CA-
130085
LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey June 3, 2014 June 5, 2014
31-CA-
130090
LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey June 3, 2014 June 5, 2014
31-CA-
132489
LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey July 9, 2014 July 11, 2014
31-CA-
135529
LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey Aug. 25,
2014
Aug. 28,
2014
31-CA-
135590
LAOC McDonald’s and Bailey Aug. 25,
2014
Aug. 28,
2014
31-CA-
129982
LAOC McDonald’s and
2Mangas
June 2, 2014 June 4, 2014
31-CA-
129982
First LAOC McDonald’s and
2Mangas
July 25,
2014
July 28, 2014
31-CA-
134237
LAOC McDonald’s and
2Mangas
Aug. 6,
2014
Aug. 7, 2014
31-CA-
128483
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
May 9, 2014 May 14,
2014
31-CA-
129027
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
May 19,
2014
May 20,
2014
31-CA-
133117
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
July 18,
2014
July 22, 2014
31-CA-
129024
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
May 19,
2014
May 20,
2014
31-CA-
130239
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
June 5, 2014 June 6, 2014
4 This charge, and all following Region 31 charges (i.e., charges associated with case numbers beginning with “31-
CA”), were served on the respective franchisee on the date indicated, and were served on McDonald’s on October
16, 2014, with the single exception of the Second Amended Charge in Case 31-CA-135729, which was filed on
December 22, 2014, and served on both Sanders and McDonald’s on December 23, 2014.
26
31-CA-
130239
First LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 12,
2014
31-CA-
131697
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
June 26,
2014
June 30,
2014
31-CA-
132913
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
July 15,
2014
July 17, 2014
31-CA-
132915
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
July 15,
2014
July 17, 2014
31-CA-
134473
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 12,
2014
31-CA-
134474
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 12,
2014
31-CA-
134478
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 13,
2014
31-CA-
134479
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 13,
2014
31-CA-
134480
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 12,
2014
31-CA-
134480
First LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Oct. 8, 2014 Oct. 10, 2014
31-CA-
134514
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 8,
2014
Aug. 12,
2014
31-CA-
135729
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Aug. 28,
2014
Sept. 2, 2014
31-CA-
135729
First LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Oct. 8, 2014 Oct. 10, 2014
31-CA-
135729
Second LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Dec. 22,
2014
Dec. 23,
2014
31-CA-
137102
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Sept. 18,
2014
Sept. 19,
2014
31-CA-
137150
LAOC McDonald’s and
Sanders
Sept. 18,
2014
Sept. 19,
2014