Michael’s Painting Co., Inc., of Van Nuys, California, became aware of an organizing campaign by the Painters Union in late March 1998. On March 27, the company employed 12 painters, with some 22 other painters being on layoff status. The union had obtained 18 signed authorization cards from a majority of the employees in the 34-person unit by March 27. On that afternoon, employees picketed at the offices of Michael’s with signs protesting the alleged failure to pay prevailing wages. The signs stated “We need a Union,” “Michael’s Painting is unfair,” “It is alright to be Union.” Union business agent Alexander Lopez spoke to owner Laurie Abikasis. Lopez told her that he had signed union authorization cards. Later in the day Mrs. Abikasis told employees that the company did not want the union and did not need the union. She also said that she and her coowner husband, Michael, would close the company rather than become a union shop. She also said she could not afford to be union—that she would go broke if she became a union shop and that the union agents were parasites. On Monday, March 30, Lopez asked Michael Abikasis to recognize the union based on the authorization cards. He stated that he would look into the matter and discuss it with Lopez at a later date. Thereafter, employees Lainez, Duenas, Romero, Martin Vega, and Carlos Vega were turned away from work by Mr. Abikasis and never again allowed to return to work. That afternoon Mrs. Abikasis told each of the employees that their paychecks could not be released unless the employees first provided a green card, Social Security number, or driver’s license; the culture in the company had been lax in this regard previously. The employees were paid later that day. The two owners transferred all of the assets and work of that company to a newly formed company “Painting LA, Inc.” During a job interview on April 20, 1998, one of the fired workers was interrogated by the employer about his and other employees’ union activities.
Identify the unfair labor practices evident in the preceding fact pattern. Is “Painting LA, Inc.” an “alter ego” of Michael’s Painting, Inc.? If so, should the NLRB impose a Gissel bargaining order or should it conduct an election to determine employee choice on the question of representation? [Michael’s Painting, Inc., 337 NLRB No. 140]