Lloyd Hollister Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 19, 1946

68 N.L.R.B. 733 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of LLOYD HOLLISTER INC and SUBURBAN PRINTERS
UNION ( INDEPENDENT)
Case No 13-R-3041.-Decided June 19, 1946
Mr. Otto Jaburek , of Chicago , Ill., for the Company.
Muench & Muench , by Mr. Morgan C Muench, of Chicago, Ill., for
the Independent.
Messrs. Nicholas N. DiPietro and Peter Larkin , both of Chicago, Ill.,
and Mr John J Pilch, of Cedar Lake, Md., all for the Typographical.
Messrs Joseph J. Seppi and Edward I. Landwehr, both of Chicago,
Ill., for the Pressmen.
Messrs. Nicholas M. DiPietro and Joseph Bryan, both of Chicago,
Ill., for the Bookbinders.
Mr Jerome J. Dick, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Suburban Printers Union (Independent),
herein called the Independent, alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Lloyd
Hollister Inc., Wilmette, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National
Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due
notice before Robert Ackerberg, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held
at Chicago, Illinois, on March 28 and 29, April 1, 3, 4, and 6, 1946.
Motions to intervene filed by Chicago Typographical Union No. 16 of the
International Typographical Union of North America, A. F. of L., here-
in called the Typographical ; International Printing Pressmen and Assis-
tants' Union of North America, A. F. of L., herein called the Pressmen ;
and Bookbinders and Paper-Cutters Union No. 8, International Brother-
hood of Bookbinders, A. F. of L., herein called the Bookbinders, were
granted by the Trial Examiner at the hearing. The Company, the Inde-
pendent, the Typographical, the Pressmen, and the Bookbinders ap-
peared and participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be
68 N. L. R B, No. 99.
733
734 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues. At the hearing the Typographical, the
Pressmen, and the Bookbinders moved to dismiss the petition herein.
For reasons stated in Section III, infra, this motion is 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:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Lloyd Hollister Inc. is an Illinois corporation with its only plant and
principal offices located at Wilmette, Illinois. The Company publishes five
weekly newspapers and is also engaged in the business of commercial
printing. The principal materials used at the plant are paper, ink, metal
type, and photo-engraving supplies and equipment. During the year
1945, the Company purchased for use at its plant raw materials valued
at $100,000, of which approximately 50 percent was shipped from points
outside the State of Illinois. During the same period, the Company pub-
lished and printed material valued at $500,000, of which approximately
10 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act.
II THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Suburban Printers Union (Independent), unaffiliated, is a labor or-
ganization' admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Chicago Typographical Union No. 16 of the International Typograph-
ical Union of North America, affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
International Printing Pressmen's and Assistants' Union of North
America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Bookbinders and Paper-Cutters Union No. 8, International Brother-
hood of Bookbinders, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
is a labor organiaztion admitting to membership employees of the Com-
pany.
, The Typogranhical, the Pressmen and the Bookbinders do not concede that the Independent
is a labor organization . However, the record discloses that the Independent exists and func-
tions as a labor organization , as defined by Section 2 (5) of the Act.
LLOYD HOLLISTER, INC.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
735
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Independent
as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees until the Inde-
pendent has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
As the result of elections, the Board on March 4, 1943, certified the
Typographical as the bargaining representative for the Company's com-
posing room employees ; on October 27, 1943, certified the Pressmen as
the bargaining representative for the Company's press room employees;
and on April 20, 1944, certified the Bookbinders as the bargaining repre-
sentative for the Company's male bindery employees. After many confer-
ences the Company and these unions were unable to reach agreements
on any important subjects of collective bargaining except that of griev-
ance procedure.2 Consequently, the disputes affecting the Typographical
and the Pressmen were certified to the Sixth Regional War Labor
Board on August 5, 1943, and May 9, 1944, respectively. The issues
in both War Labor Board cases involved wage increases, basic wage
rates, the closed shop, shift differentials, and vacation plans. The Book-
binders and the Company agreed to abide by the War Labor Board's dis-
position of these two cases.
On August 23, 1944, prior to the issuance of any Labor Board
directive, the Company, the Typographical, the Pressmen, and the Book-
binders agreed to submit joint applications to the Regional War Labor
Board for the approval of a 5-percent wage increase, retroactive to
July 1, 1944.3
On September 20, 1944, the Regional War Labor Board issued a
directive in the Typographical's case. It provided for (1) maintenance of
membership (no check-off) ; (2) a general wage increase of 61/2 cents
per hour retroactive to August 5, 1943,4 (3) the Typographical and the
Company to negotiate and enter into an agreement containing an escalator
clause which would raise the existing wage rate to the rates prevailing in
Chicago; (4) a shift differential of 10 cents an hour; (5) a vacation
plan; and (6) the parties to negotiate concerning the proper classification
for teletype setters and the rating of certain employees as foremen.6 On
October 3, 1944, the Company filed its petition for review of this direc-
tive. Subsequently, on March 28, 1945, the National War Labur Board
affirmed virtually all provisions of the Regional War Labor Board's
' The Company and the Typographical on December 11, 1943, entered into a written
contract relating only to grievance procedure. Similar agreements were effected between the
Company and the Pressmen and the Bookbinders, respectively
' This application was finally approved by the Regional War Labor Board in February 1945,
and the Company granted the wage increase as approved.
* The parties agree that the 5-percent general wage increase granted by the Company was
the equivalent of the 6% cents per hour increase, provided for in this directive
' On December 28, 1944, the Regional War Labor Board issued a supplementary directive
amending the vacation plan set out in its original directive
736 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
directive merely remanding the vacation issue to the Region for recon-
sideration.6 A supplemental directive was issued by the National War
Labor Board on April 30, 1945, relating to shift differentials.
Despite numerous meetings from April through July 12, 1945, the
Typographical and the Company failed to arrive at an agreement. Mean-
while, on July 10, 1945, a panel of the Sixth Regional War Labor Board
issued a report in the Pressmen's case which contained provisions similar
to those in the directive issued by this Board in the Typographical's case.
On July 20, 1945, the Typographical notified the Regional War Labor
Board that the Company was not complying with that Board's directive.
As a result, an order-to-show-cause hearing was held August 14, 1945,
at which time the Regional War Labor Board found that the Company
was not acquiescing in its directives, and on August 28, 1945, the case was
forwarded to the National War Labor Board for the purpose of obtain-
ing compliance. On October 15, 1945, the National War Labor Board
advised the Typographical and the Company that, "inasmuch as there is
no appeal pending, the Board considers the case closed."7
On August 31, 1945, the Typographical, the Pressmen, and the Book-
binders went on strike. The Independent filed its petition herein on
December 6, 1945. Thereafter the Regional War Labor Board in its last
executive session on December 24, 1945, refused to consider the Press-
men's case because of its strike . In an effort to settle their differences, the
Company, the Typographical, the Pressmen, and the Bookbinders con-
tinued to negotiate almost to the date of the hearing in this case, but to
no avail.
Each of the three A. F. of L. unions contends that the Allis-Chalmers
doctrine3 is applicable insofar as it is concerned. We do not agree.
The Typographical was certified by the Board approximately 3 years
ago. As no agreement could be reached with the Company after 4 months
of collective bargaining, proceedings were instituted before the Regional
War Labor Board. That agency issued a directive on September 20, 1944,
which resolved substantially all of the issues between the parties, and
which in March 1945, was affirmed by the National War Labor Board
with little change. After negotiating with the Company thereafter for
approximately 5 months, the Typographical called a strike. And dealings
continued between these parties for a further period of about 4 months,
at which time the Independent, filed its petition herein. Thus, about 9
months elapsed between the date of the National Board's action resolv-
ing virtually all substantial issues in dispute between the Typographical
° On July 6, 1945, the Regional War Labor Board adhered to its original finding regarding
the vacation issue.
r The parties disagree as to the purport of this statement , and the record sheds no further
light on its precise meaning.
' Matter of Allis-Chalmers Manufactursnp Company , 50 N. L. R. B. 306.
LLOYD HOLLISTER, INC. 737
and the Company, and the date the Independent filed its petition in the
instant case. This period, we are convinced, afforded the Typographical a
reasonable time within which to obtain from the Company an agreement
embodying the content of the National War Labor Board's ruling. That
failure to achieve this goal may have been attributable to circumstances
beyond the Typographical's control cannot be regarded in the circum-
stances as determinative of the issue. Were we to view this factor as a
controlling consideration we would be compelled to hold that the Typo-
graphical's status as bargaining agent must remain undisturbed indefi-
nitely. Such a holding, moreover, would unjustly deprive employees of the
Company of their right to designate representatives at reasonable inter-
vals. We conclude, therefore, that the Allis-Chalmers doctrine is not appli-
cable so far as the Typographical is concerned.9
We think that there is less merit to the Pressmen's attempt to invoke
this doctrine. After its dispute with the Company was certified to the
War Labor Board and before the Regional Board had an opportunity to
act upon a panel report, the Pressmen went on strike. As a consequence,
the Regional Board refused to consider the Pressmen's case. Since the
Pressmen prevented the Regional War Labor Board from processing
its case, delay in obtaining the benefits of collective bargaining for the
employees the Pressmen represented cannot be said to have resulted from
proceedings before the War Labor Board.10
As noted above, the Bookbinders and the Company agreed to abide
by the results of the War Labor Board cases involving the Typographical
and the Pressmen. Hence, viewed in its most favorable aspect, the
Bookbinders' position before us is no better than that of the Typo-
graphical and the Pressmen. We find, consequently , that the principle
of the Allis-Chalmers case is also inapplicable insofar as the Bookbinders
is concerned.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hearing,
indicates that the Independent represents a substantial number of em-
ployees in the unit alleged by it to be appropriate."'
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.
See Matter of Jackson Box Company , 59 N. L. R. B. 808 . Cf. Matter of California Door
Company, 64 N. L. R. B . 5; Matter of Craddock -Terry Shoe Corporation, 67 N. L R. B. 105
10 See Matter of Automatic Transportation Company, Division of The Yale & Towne Mfg Co,
59 N. L R. B 970.
11 The Field Examiner reported that the Independent submitted 60 cards, of which 59 bore
the names of employees listed on the Company's pay roll of January 9, 1946; and that the
cards were dated from November 1945 to January 1946. There are approximately 80 employees
in the unit alleged by the Independent to be appropriate.
For their interests in this proceeding, the Typographical, the Pressmen and the Bookbinders
rely upon their past certifications.
738 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV THE APPROPRIATE UNITS
The Independent contends that the appropriate unit should consist of
all the Company's production and maintenance employees, including
utility men, but excluding clericals and office workers and all supervisory
employees. The Typographical, however, seeks a unit consisting of all
the Company's composing room employees,12 including foremen and
assistant foremen, excluding stereotypers and apprentices, and offset
plate makers and apprentices, and all other employees. The Pressmen
demands a unit composed of the Company's pressmen employees,13 in-
cluding foremen and assistant foremen, but excluding all other employees.
And the Bookbinders seeks a unit of the Company's bindery employees'14
excluding the bindery girls, Elmer Valkener, and all other employees. The
Company takes no affirmative position concerning whether there should
be one comprehensive unit or craft units.
In the event that these three craft units sought by the A. F. of L.
unions are established, the Independent contends, in opposition to the
Typographical, the Pressmen, and the Company, that foremen and assis-
tant foremen should be excluded from the composing room and press-
room units, respectively. In addition, the Independent and the Company
assert, in opposition to the Typographical, that the stereotypers, offset
plate makers and their apprentices be included in the unit of composing
room employees. Moreover, the Independent and the Company, in oppo-
sition to the Bookbinders, urges that the bindery girls be included in
the unit of bindery employees ; and the Company, contrary to the Inde-
pendent and the Bookbinders, contends that Elmer Valkener should also
be included in the bindery unit.
The Company publishes weekly newspapers and is also engaged in the
business of commercial printing Its plant consists of the composing room,
pressroom, and bindery. The Typographical started organizing the Com-
pany's composing room employees as early as February 1941 and has
been their bargaining representative since 1943. The Pressmen started
their campaign among the Company's pressroom employees in 1942 and
has been their bargaining representative since 1943. The Bookbinders
has been the bargaining representative of the bindery male employees
since 1944. There also has been a long history of collective bargaining in
the printing industry predicated upon separate units of composing room
employees, pressroom employees, and bindery employees.
12 This includes Linotype operators, Linotype machinists, compositors, Ludlow operators,
make up men, lock up men, mark up men, proofreaders, teletype-setter typists, tape punchers,
apprentices, bank boys, and lay-out men
This includes pressmen, assistant pressmen , and feeders
This includes folding and cutting machine operators
LLOYD HOLLISTER, INC. 739
Considering these facts and the difference in the skills and working
techniques of the employees involved, we are persuaded that the three
craft units sought by the Typographical, the Pressmen, and the Book-
binders are basically appropriate. We shall also establish a residual unit
consisting of the Company's utility men and other employees we herein-
after exclude from the craft groupings.
'There remains for consideration the foremen and assistant foremen in
the composing room and pressroom craft units,15 the stereotypers and the
offset plate makers in the composing room craft unit, and Elmer Valkener
and the bindery girls in the bindery craft unit.
The foremen and assistant foremen in the composing room and the
foremen and assistant foremen in the pressroom have duties similar to
those of working foremen and assistant foremen found throughout the
printing industry. We have customarily included such foremen and
assistant foremen in craft units in the printing trades.16 Accordingly, we
shall include the composing room foremen and assistant foremen in the
unit of composing room employees, and the pressroom foremen and as-
sistant foremen in the unit of pressroom employees.
The stereotypers prepare stereotype casts or plates which are used in
the course of composing the printing forms. They are separated from the
composing room proper by a wooden partition. They are considered a
separate craft in the printing industry and are ineligible for member-
ship in the Typographical. Under the circumstances, we shall exclude
the stereotypers from the composing room unit, but shall include them
in the residual unit with the utility men.
The offset plate makers work in a separate area of the composing
room and use the photographic equipment customarily used in photo-
engraving processes. They are ineligible for membership to the Typo-
graphical, and customarily are excluded from units of composing room
employees. We shall therefore exclude the offset plate makers from the
composing room unit, but shall include them in the residual unit.
Although Elmer Valkener spends 60 percent of his time doing manual
work in the bindery, he is the superintendent of both the bindery and the
pressroom. We excluded him from a voting group of the Company's male
bindery employees which we established in Matter of Lloyd Hollister,
Inc.17 and there has been no change in his duties since that decision was
issued. In view of his status as superintendent, we shall exclude him
from all units 18
70 Apparently there are no such employees working in the bindery.
1 See e . g. Matter of Harlick Manufacturing Company, 35 N. L. R. B. 1429; Matter of
Service Printers, Incorporated, 54 N. L. R. B. 1082.
IT 55 N. L. R. B. 32.
ie See Matter of Country Life Press Corporation, 51 N. L . R. B. 1362.
696966-46-48
740 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The bindery girls perform less skilled work than the male bindery
employees. In Matter of Lloyd Hollister, Inc., supra, we excluded bindery
girls from the voting group of male bindery workers because of differ-
ence in skill, and adverted to the bargaining history in the industry,
particularly in the Chicago area, premised upon units of male bindery
employees. Later in that proceeding we found a unit of the male bindery
workers to be appropriate as a consequence of the election results. The
status of the bindery girls has not changed. Therefore, we shall exclude
them from the bindery unit, but we shall include them in the residual unit.
We find that the following units of employees of the Company's
Wilmette, Illinois, plant are appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
(1) All employees in the composing room, including linotype operators,
linotype machinists, compositors, Ludlow operators, make up men, lock
up men, work up men, proofreaders, teletypesetter typists, tape punchers,
apprentices, bank boys, lay-out men, foremen and assistant foremen, but
excluding stereotypers and apprentices, offset plate makers and appren-
tices, and all other employees;
(2) All employees in the press room, including pressmen, assistant
pressmen, feeders, foremen and assistant foremen, but excluding all other
employees ;
(3) All employees in the bindery, including all folding and cutting
machine operators, but excluding the bindery girls, Elmer Valkener, and
all other employees ;
(4) All utility men, offset plate makers, stereotypers, and bindery girls,
excluding Elmer Valkener and all other employees.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has
arisen be resolved by separate elections by secret ballot. As stated before,
the Typographical, the Pressmen and the Bookbinders struck on August
31, 1945. The Company and the Independent contend that this strike
is not current and that only employees actually listed on the Company's
pay roll immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elections
should be permitted to vote. But the Typographical, the Pressmen and the
Bookbinders assert that the strike is, in fact, current and that only the
strikers should be permitted to vote on the basis of the Sartorious case-19
The Typographical, the Pressmen and the Bookbinders have continu-
ously maintained picket lines at the Company's plant from August 31,
1945, to the date of the hearing. In addition, they have continued to pay
strike benefits to the Company's striking employees, and have maintained
19 Matter of A Sartorious & Co, Inc, 9 N L. R B. 19.
LLOYD HOLLISTER, INC. 741
the Company on their "unfair list ." Moreover, the Company has con-
tinued to meet with them in an effort to terminate the strike. Under the
circumstances, we are of the opinion that the strike is current 20
The Sartorious case is no longer the law, having long ago been over-
ruled by the Wurlitzer case.21 We find, in accordance with the principle
enunciated in the Wurlitzer case , that the policies of the Act will best be
effectuated by declaring eligible to vote employees in the appropriate units
who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the
date of our Direction of Elections herein, subject to the limitations, and
additions set forth in the Direction , including both the employees on
strike and their replacements 22
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
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 representatives
for the purposes of collective bargaining with Lloyd Hollister, Inc., Wil-
mette, Illinois, separate elections by secret ballot shall be conducted as
early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of
this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Thirteenth 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 units
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 elections, to determine :
(1) Whether the employees in Unit (1), described in Section IV,
above, desire to be represented by Suburban Printers Union (Inde-
pendent), or by Chicago Typographical Union No. 16 of the Inter-
$0 See Matter of Kokomo Sanitary Pottery Corporation , 26 N. L . R. B. 1.
Si Matter of The Rudolph Wurlitzer Company, 32 N. L. R. B. 163.
s' See Matter of Columbia Pictures Corporation , 61 N. L. R. B. 1030; Matter of Higgins
Industries , Inc., 65 N. L R. B. 50.
Nothing in this decision shall be construed as indicating that the Boaru has prejudged in
any respect any subsidiary eligibility issues arising from the strike , such as whether or not
specified strikers have lost their employee status. These questions may be raised by appro.
priate challenges to the ballots of particular individuals.
742 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
national Typographical Union of North America, A. F. of L., for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
(2) Whether the employees in Unit (2), described in Section IV,
above, desire to be represented by Suburban Printers Union ( Indepen-
dent ), or by International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of
North America , A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining,
or by neither ;
(3) Whether the employees in Unit (3), described in Section IV,
above, desire to be represented by Suburban Printers Union ( Indepen-
dent), or by Bookbinders and Paper-Cutters Union No. 8, International
Brotherhood of Bookbinders , A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither ; and
(4) Whether or not the employees in Unit (4), described in Section
IV, above, desire to be represented by Suburban Printers Union (In-
dependent ), for the purposes of collective bargaining.