George W. Prescott Publishing Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 14, 1945

64 N.L.R.B. 1390 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of GEORGE W. PRESCOTT PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC.
(QUINCY PATRIOT LEDGER ) and QUINCY PATRIOT LEDGER EDITORIAL
ASSOCIATION
Case No. 1-R-2393.-Decided December 14. 1945
Messrs. Choate, Hall di Stewart, by Mr. Stuart C. Rand, of Boston,
Mass., for the Company.
Mr. Francis X. Hurley, of Boston, Mass., for the Association.
Messrs. Isserman, Isserman d Kapelsohn, by Mr. Morris Isserman,
of Newark, N. J., for the Guild.
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF TIIE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Quincy Patriot Ledger Editorial
Association, herein called the Association, alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of George W. Prescott Publishing Company, Inc. (Quincy
Patriot Ledger), Quincy, Massachusetts, herein called the Company,
the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hear-
ing upon due notice before Leo J. Halloran, Trial Examiner. The
hearing was held at Quincy, Massachusetts, on August 7, 1945. The
Company, the Association, and Newspaper Guild of Quincy, affiliated
with the American Newspaper Guild, C. I. 0., herein called the Guild,
appeared and participated. All parties were afforded an opportunity
to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues. At the hearing, the Guild moved for
dismissal of the petition herein. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling
on the motion for the Board. For reasons stated in Section IV, infra,
the motion is hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All
parties were. afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
64 N. L. R. B., No. 229.
1390
GEORGE W. PRESCOTT PUBLISHING CODIPANY, INC. 1391
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
George W. Prescott Publishing Company, Inc., a Massachusetts
corporation with its place of business located in Quincy, Massachu-
setts, is the publisher of the Quincy Patriot Ledger, a newspaper with
a daily circulation of about 28,000 copies. Approximately 750 to 1,000
copies are sold at points located outside the Commonwealth, of Massa-
chusetts. In 1944, the Company purchased about 1,200 tons of news-
print, valued at approximately $60,000 to $70,000, most of which was
obtained from points outside the Commonwealth. In addition, the-
Company purchased other materials from without the Commonwealth.
The total advertising in the Quincy Patriot Ledger for the year 1944
approximated $350,000 to $400,000, of which about 7 to 8 percent was
so-called "national advertising." The Company pays approximately-
$7,000 annually for various news services.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Quincy Patriot Ledger Editorial Association, unaffiliated; and
Newspaper Guild of Quincy, affiliated with the American Newspaper-
Guild, in turn affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
are labor organizations admitting to membership employees of the-
Company.
111. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In December 1943, the Guild was designated after a consent election
as the representative of the Company's editorial department em-
ployees.' On July 28, 1944, it executed a contract with the Company
covering these employees. This contract provided that it was to "ex-
pire on the ninth day of May 1945," and contained no provision for-
its renewal. In January 1945, after a second consent election, the
Guild was designated as the representative of the Company's circula-
tion department employees.2 The following month it executed a sup-
plemental agreement with the Company which provided for an ex-
tension of the July 28, 1944, contract so as to cover the employees of
the circulation department. However, the supplemental agreement
specifically provided that the provisions in the contract of July 28,
1944, concerning wages and hours of employment were not to apply
1 Case No 1-R-1698.
2 Case No. 1-R-2225.
1392 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
to the circulation department employees, these matters being reserved
for future negotiations between the parties.
In March 1945, many editorial department employees decided to seek
separate representation for all the employees of that department.
They formed the Association, and requested that the Company bargain
with it. The Company refused to do so because of its contract with the
Guild. On April 2, 1945, the Company and the Guild executed an
agreement, covering the wages and hours of the circulation depart-
ment employees, intending to incorporate this agreement into the con-
tract existing between the parties after approval by the War Labor
Board. The terms of this agreement were thereafter submitted to that
agency for approval; however, as of the date of the hearing herein,
approval had not been forthcoming.
On April 5, 1945, a meeting of the Guild's membership which "at
least six" editorial department employees attended, was held, and a
series of proposed changes in the existing contract with the Company
was drawn. These changes were submitted to the Company, which
refused to negotiate with respect to them because of the pendency of
the petition in this proceeding which had been filed on April 4, 1945.
We find that the contract of July 28, 1944, having terminated, does
not constitute a bar to a current determination of representatives.
However, the Guild contends that no election should be directed at this
time because (a) it has not had a full year within which to enjoy the
fruits of collective bargaining on behalf of the employees in the unit
ultimately covered by the contract, and (b) a proceeding timely in-
stituted before the War Labor Board concerning some of the employees
in this unit (the circulation department employees) is still before that
agency.
As hereinafter found in Section IV, infra, we are of the opinion
that the editorial department employees constitute an appropriate
collective bargaining unit. Inasmuch as the Guild has represented
these employees for at least a year, we find no merit in the Guild's
first contention. And since the hatters pending before the War Labor
Board do not affect the editorial department employees, we also reject
the Guild's second contention.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the Association represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriates
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company within, the meaning of
Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
3 A Field Examiner reported that the Association submitted 17 designations which
"checked" with the Company's pay roll for the period ending April 5, 1945. The record
indicates that there are approximately 18 emploA ees in the appropriate unit.
The Guild's interest is established by its recently expired contract with the Company.
GEORGE W. PRESCOTT PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC. 1393
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Association seeks a unit comprised of all editorial department
employees of the Company, excluding the managing editor. The
Guild contends that this unit is inappropriate because its collective
bargaining history with the Company indicates that the proper unit
is comprised of both editorial and circulation department employees.
The Company, although ostensibly neutral, asserts that " the bargain-
ing unit in each department [should be] the free choice of the em-
ployees directly concerned."
The record shows that there is a substantial difference in the nature
of the work performed by the employees of the two departments.
Thus, the circulation department is concerned with the distribution of
the newspaper, whereas the work of the editorial department is com-
pleted when the newspaper has been compiled. In addition, as indi-
cated in Section III, above, the Guild was separately designated at
different times as the representative of the employees in each depart-
ment. In such circumstances, absent a compelling history of col-
lective bargaining upon a multiple-department basis, a finding, as
urged by the Association, that the editorial department employees
constitute a separate appropriate emit, is clearly warranted.
We turn, therefore, to a consideration of the bargaining history.
The Guild was designated as the representative of the Company's cir-
culation department employees in January 1945, and has represented
the employees in both departments jointly only from February, when
it executed the supplemental agreement with the Company, until May,
when the contract terminated, a period of approximately 3 months.
Furthermore, the Guild and the Company did not agree upon all the
terms and conditions of employment of the circulation department
employees until April, 1 month before the contract's termination, at
which time these parties reached an understanding as to the wages
and hours of such employees, and, so far as the record is concerned,
this understanding was never incorporated into the contract. It is
plain from these facts that there has not been a compelling history of
collective bargaining upon the basis of a single unit comprised of em-
ployees of both the editorial and circulation departments.
Although the Guild cites in support of its position the Sacramento
and Globe cases,4 we are of the opinion that they are distinguishable.
In the Sacramento case, the employees of the editorial and circulation
departments were represented in a single unit for a period of at least
a year. During that period, moreover, all terms and conditions of em-
ployment of the employees in the unit were fixed. And, in the Globe
case, the Board's determination was predicated upon its previous find-
4 Matter of Sacramento Publishing Company , Ltd, 57 N. L. R. B. 1636 ; Matter of Globe
Newspaper Company, 31 N L. R B. 916.
670417-46-vol 64-89
1394 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing that a multiple-department unit was appropriate, a fact not pres-
ent in the instant case.
We find, therefore, that all editorial department employees of the
Company, excluding the managing editor and all other supervisory
employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or
otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively rec-
ommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
V. TILE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among employees
in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein,
subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with George W. Prescott
Publishing Company Inc. (Quincy Patriot Ledger), Quincy, Massa-
chusetts, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as
possible but not later than sixty (60) days from the date of this
Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director
for the First Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National
Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11,
of said Rules and Regulations, among employees in the unit found
appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including
employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees
in the'armed forces of the United States who present themselves in
person at the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit
or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated
prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to
be represented by Quincy Patriot Ledger Editorial Association, un-
affiliated, or by Newspaper Guild of Quincy, affiliated with the Amer-
ican Newspaper Guild, C. 1. 0., for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining, or by neither.
MR. JOAN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
J