Local 28, Int'l Stereotypers' & Electrotypers', Etc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 7, 1963

140 N.L.R.B. 480 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

480 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WE hereby rescind the company rule promulgated on June 14, 1961, which
prohibits union activity by employees on our premises.
WE WILL NOT urge and request employees to form a company union and to
inform on the union activities of other employees.
WE WILL NOT threaten employees with discharge because of their union
activities.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with, restrain , or coerce our
employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization , to form labor
organizations , to join or assist National Association of Broadcast Employees
and Technicians , AFL-CIO, or any other labor organization , to bargain collec-
tively through representatives of their own choosing , to engage in concerted
activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or mutual aid or protection,
or to refrain from any or all such activities , except to the extent that such rights
may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization
as a condition of employment , as authorized in Section 8(a)(3) of the Act, as
modified by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959.
WE WILL make whole the following employees for any loss of earnings they
may have suffered by reason of the discrimination against them:
Robert Maddox Paul Workman Kenneth Jones
James Barbour Richard Mays Erskine Barton
Eddy Gene Stephenson John Conrad John James
Andrew Nagler Lewis Rowman Eugene Henson
Walter McClure James Reynolds
Charles Coop Daisy Reynolds
All our employees are free to become , remain, or refrain from becoming or re-
maining members of any labor organization , except to the extent that this right may
be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a
condition of employment , as authorized in Section 8(a)(3) of the Act.
REEVES BROADCASTING & DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION (WHTN-TV),
Employer.
Dated- ------------------ By-------------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be
altered , defaced , or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board 's Regional Office, Transit
Building , 4th & Vine Streets, Cincinnati , Ohio, Telephone No. Dunbar 1-1420, if
they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions.
Local 28, International Stereotypers ' and Electrotypers' Union
of North America, AFL-CIO and Capital Electrotype Com-
pany, Inc. Case No. 3-CD-56. January 7, 1963
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a charge filed on June 28, 1961, by Capital Electrotype Com-
pany, Inc., herein called Capital, the General Counsel of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board, herein called the General Counsel, by
the Regional Director for the Third Region, issued a complaint dated
August 10, 1962, against Local 28, International Stereotypers' and
Electrotypers' Union of North America, AFL-CIO, herein called the
Respondent, alleging that Respondent had engaged in and was en-
gaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the mean-
ing of Sections 8(b) (4) (D) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. Copies of
140 NLRB No. 49.
LOCAL 28, INT'L STEREOTYPERS' & ELECTROTYPERS', ETC. 481
the complaint, the charge, and notice of hearing were duly served upon
the Respondent and Capital.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleged
that: pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, the Board heard and made
a determination of dispute out of which the charged unfair labor prac-
tice arose; the Board's determination was that Capital and its affiliate,
Williams Press, Inc., herein called Williams, are a single employer
within the meaning of the Act; the employees of Williams engaged as
printing pressmen, currently represented by Albany Printing Press-
men and Assistant's Union No. 23, International Printing Pressmen
and Assistants Union of North America, AFL-CIO, hereinafter re-
ferred to as the Pressmen, are entitled to position and register electro-
type plates on magnesium carrying devices for Williams; the Respond-
ent is not lawfully entitled to force or require Capital and Williams
to assign the disputed plate positioning and registering work to its
members rather than to printing pressmen; the Respondent has not
complied with the Board's Decision and Determination of Dispute
(137 NLRB 1467) ; the Respondent since on or about April 21, 1961,
and at all times thereafter, by means proscribed by Section 8(b) (4)
has engaged in conduct an object of which was to force or require
Capital to assign the disputed work tasks to employees who are mem-
bers of Respondent rather than to employees of Williams who are
represented by the Pressmen; and by such conduct, the Respondent
has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (D) of the Act. On or about August 14, 1962,
the Respondent filed an answer to the complaint denying the com-
mission of the alleged unfair labor practices.
On August 24, 1962, the parties filed with the Board under the
provisions of Section 102.50 of the Board's Rules and Regulations,
Series 8, as amended, a joint motion that the proceeding be transferred
to the Board. The motion contains a stipulation that the charge, com-
plaint, notice of hearing, and answer in the present proceeding, and
the Board's Decision and Determination of Dispute and the record in
the Section 10(k) proceeding, constitute the entire record in this case
and that no oral testimony is necessary or desired by any of the parties.
The parties also waived a hearing before a Trial Examiner and the is-
suance of an Intermediate Report and Recommended Order, and sub-
mitted the case for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and an order
directly by the Board. On September 5, 1962, the Board granted the
motion and this proceeding was duly transferred to and continued be-
fore the Board.
Upon the basis of the stipulation, the record in the Section 10(k)
proceeding, and the briefs filed by the General Counsel, the Respond-
ent, the Charging Party, and the Pressmen, the Board makes the
following :
482 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The business of Capital and Williams
Capital is engaged in manufacturing printing plates, and Williams
in the operation of a printing plant both in Menands, New York.
During the year preceding the hearing, Capital and Williams each pur-
chased goods valued at more than $50,000 from sources outside the
State of New York. The Respondent's answer to the complaint admits
and we find that Capital and Williams, individually and collectively,
are an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section
2(6) and (7) of the Act.'
2. The labor organizations involved
Respondent and the Pressmen are labor organizations within the
meaning of the Act.
3. The Respondent's unfair labor practices
In its Decision and Determination of Dispute, the Board determined
that the Respondent was not lawfully entitled to force or require
Capital to assign the work of positioning and registering electrotype
plates on magnesium carriers to Respondent's members rather than to
employees of Williams, represented by the Pressmen, by means pro-
scribed by Section 8(b) (4) (D). The Board directed the Respondent
to notify the Regional Director in writing with respect to its intention
to comply with the Board's determination. The Respondent by letter
dated July 27, 1962, indicated that it did not intend to comply.
Section 10(k) of the Act requires that, if the Respondent has com-
plied with the Board's determination, the 8(b) (4) (D) charge must be
dismissed. As the Respondent has not complied with the 10(k) deter-
mination, we turn now to the merits of the complaint which, as we
have indicated, is concerned with whether the Respondent has engaged
in unfair labor practices in violation of Section 8(b) (4) (D).
The evidence in the 10(k) proceeding is clear and uncontradicted
that the Respondent engaged in unlawful inducement with the objec-
tive of forcing Capital to assign the disputed plate positioning and reg-
istering work to the Respondent's members rather than to Williams'
employees who were represented by the Pressmen. Thus, on various
dates in April 1961, the Respondent's agents, Maffeo, McDougall, and
Brown, requested assignment of the disputed work to the Respondent's
members. On or about April 21 or 22, the Respondent's members
refused to perform certain work ordered by Capital on electrotype
'The Board has found that Capital and Williams constitute a single employer within
the meaning of the Act. 137 NLRB 1467.
LOCAL 28, INT'L STEREOTYPERS' & ELECTROTYPERS', ETC. 483
printing plates, destined to be attached to magnesium carriers. Short-
ly after this refusal to perform the assigned work, the Respondent's
agents advised Ashmead, Capital's president, that the Respondent's
members had refused to manufacture the plates because they believed
that positioning and registering the manufactured plates on mag-
nesium carrying devices was also their work. They also warned him
that their members would not in the future perform their regular
work on this type of plate unless they were also assigned the work in
dispute. The Respondent's members refused a similar assignment on
May 2. On May 8, the Respondent advised Ashmead that it would
fight Capital's assignment of the disputed work "all the way." On
July 12, 13, and 25, the Respondent's members refused to work over-
time on the same type of electrotype printing plates. On July 25,
Maffeo, the Respondent's president, told Ashmead that this refusal was
related to the disputed work assignment. Thereafter, the Respondent
agreed that all of Capital's work orders would be filled, and its work
assignments would not be contested, until the matter was settled.
While there is no direct evidence that the Respondent's agents in-
duced the work stoppages of the employees, it is clear that the Respond-
ent controlled the actions of its members or ratified them after they took
place. Thus, on the occasion of the first stoppage in April, the Re-
spondent's agents admitted its purpose and predicted future stoppages
with the same object. In May, the Respondent informed Ashmead
that it would fight Capital's objectionable assignment of the disputed
work, and, after the stoppage in July, the Respondent assured Capital
that no further stoppages would occur until the matter was settled.
Moreover, since inducement may take many forms, we believe that the
Respondent's frequently voiced opposition to Capital's assignment of
the disputed work was itself an inducement of the employees to en-
gage in the foregoing stoppages .2
In its brief in this proceeding, the Respondent does not contest the
fact of the inducement, its responsibility therefor, or the objective it
sought. The Respondent's sole defense is that the Board's Decision
and Determination of Dispute erroneously awarded the disputed work
to pressmen employed by Williams by failing to interpret properly the
contractual provision which allegedly assigned the work to it. The
arguments advanced to support this defense were considered and re-
jected by the Board in making its determination in the Section 10(k)
proceeding herein. We adhere to that determination.
Accordingly, we conclude that the Respondent, in causing these work
stoppages for the proscribed object of forcing Capital to change its
work assignments, has violated Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (D) of
e Local 756, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, et al. (The
Martin Company ), 131 NLRB 1010, 1017.
681-492-63-vol. 140-32
484 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Act.' We also conclude that Respondent's assertion to Capital on
or about April 21 or 22 that its members would continue to refuse to
work on this type of electrotype printing plate until they also received
from Capital an assignment of the disputed work is a "threat" for a
proscribed object, which also violates Section 8(b) (4) (ii) (D) of the
Act.4
4. The effect of the unfair labor practices upon commerce
The activities of the Respondent set forth above, occurring in con-
nection with the operation of Capital and Williams, have a close, inti-
mate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among
the several States, and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and
obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
5. The remedy
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices , we shall order it to cease and desist therefrom and take
certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Respondent, Local 28, International Stereotypers' and Electro-
typers' Union of North America, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By engaging in, or inducing or encouraging employees of Capital
Electrotype Company, Inc., or of other persons engaged in commerce
or in an industry affecting commerce, to engage in, a strike or a refusal
in the course of their employment to use, manufacture, process, trans-
port, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or
commodities or to perform services; or by threatening, coercing, or re-
straining -Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., or other persons en-
gaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, where, in
either case, an object thereof is forcing or requiring Capital Electro-
type Company, Inc., to assign the work of positioning and registering
electrotype plates on magnesium carrying devices to members of the
Respondent rather than to employees of Williams Press, Inc., repre-
sented by Albany Pressmen and Assistants Union No. 23, International
Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union of North America, AFL-
CIO, where Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., is not failing to con-
8Local 598 Plumbers and Steamfitters (Kennewick) and Local 44 Plumbers and Steam-
fitters (Spokane ), et al. (MacDonald-Scott & Associates), 131 NLRB 787, 800; Amalga-
mated Lithographers of America and Local 78, at al . (Miami Post Company), 130 NLRB
968, 978; Local Union 825, International Brotherhood of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO
(Carleton Brothers Company), 131 NLRB 452, 453.
'Highway Truckdrivers and Helpers, Local No. 107, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Independent (Ries & Com-
pany, Inc.), 130 NLRB 943, 947, enfd. 300 F. 2d 317 (C.A. 3).
LOCAL 28, INT'L STEREOTYPERS' & ELECTROTYPERS', ETC. 485
form to an order or certification of the Board determining the bargain-
ing representative for employees performing such work, Respondent
has thereby engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within
the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (D) and Section 2(6)
and (7) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in the case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Local 28, Inter-
national Stereotypers' and Electrotypers' Union of North America,
AFL-CIO, and its officers, representatives, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall :
1. Cease and desist from engaging in, or inducing or encouraging
individuals employed by Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., or by
other persons engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting com-
merce, to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of their employ-
ment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or
work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform
any services; or threatening, coercing, or restraining Capital Electro-
type Company, Inc., or any other person engaged in commerce or in an
industry affecting commerce, where in either case an object thereof is
to force or require Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., to assign the
work of positioning and registering electrotype printing plates on
magnesium carrying devices to Respondent's members, rather than to
employees of Williams Press, Inc., who are represented by Albany
Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 23, International Print-
ing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, AFL-CIO,
unless Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., is failing to conform to an
order or certification of the Board determining the bargaining repre-
sentative for employees performing such work.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Post in Respondent's business offices and meeting halls, copies
of the attached notice marked "Appendix A." 5 Copies of said notice
to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Third Region, shall,
after being duly signed by an authorized representative of the Re-
spondent, be posted by it immediately upon receipt thereof and main-
tained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places,
including all places where notices to members are customarily posted.
5In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words "Pursuant to a Decision and Order" the
words "Pursuant to a Decree of the United States Court of Appeals, Enforcing an Order."
486 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Reasonable steps shall be taken to insure that such notices are not
altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Sign and mail sufficient copies of said notice to the Regional
Director for the Third Region for posting, Capital Electrotype Com-
pany, Inc., and Williams Press, Inc., willing, at all locations where
notices to their respective employees are customarily posted.
(c) Notify the Regional Director, within 10 days from the date of
this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith.
MEMBER BROWN took no part in the consideration of the above Deci-
sion and Order.
APPENDIX A
NOTICE To ALL OUR MEMBERS AND TO ALL EMPLOYEES OF CAPITAL
ELECTROTYPE COMPANY, INC., AND WILLIAMS PRESS, INC.
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations
Board and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Re-
lations Act, as amended, we hereby notify you that :
WE WILL NOT engage in, or induce or encourage the employees
of Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., or any other person en-
gaged in commerce, or in an industry affecting commerce, to en-
gage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of their employment to.
use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work
on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities and to perform
services; or threaten, coerce, or restrain Capital Electrotype
Company, Inc., or other persons engaged in commerce, or in an
industry affecting commerce, where, in either case, an object is to
force or require Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., to assign the
work of positioning and registering electrotype printing plates on
magnesium carrying devices art its plant in Menands, New York,
to members of our labor organization rather than to employees of
Williams Press, Inc., who are represented by Albany Printing
Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 23, International Printing
Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, AFL-CIO,
where Capital Electrotype Company, Inc., is not failing to con-
form to an order or certification of the Board determining the
bargaining representative for the employees performing the
above-mentioned work.
LOCAL 28, INTERNATIONAL STEREO-
TYPERS' AND ELECTROTYPERS' UNION
OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL-CIO,
Labor Organization.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
JAMES LEES AND SONS COMPANY 487
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the
date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any
other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional
Office, The 120 Building, 120 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo 2, New York,
Telephone No. Tl. 6-1782, if they have any question concerning this
notice or compliance with its provisions.
James Lees and Sons Company and Textile Workers Union of
America, AFL-CIO, CLC. Case No. 5-CA-2104. January 7,1963
DECISION AND ORDER
On September 20, 1962, Trial Examiner Harold X. Summers issued
his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding
that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain un-
fair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached
Intermediate Report. The Trial Examiner also found that the Re-
spondent had not engaged in certain other unfair labor practices,
and recommended dismissal of the complaint insofar as it pertained
thereto.' Thereafter, the Respondent and the Charging Party filed
exceptions to the Intermediate Report and briefs in support thereof.
The Board 2 has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the In-
termediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record
in the case, and finds merit in the Respondent's exceptions for the
reasons discussed below. Accordingly, the Board adopts only those
findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner
which are consistent with this Decision and Order.
The sole issue in this case is whether or not Raymond Tolley was
discharged in violation of Section 8(a) (3) and (1) of the Act. The
Trial Examiner found that Tolley was so discharged. We do not
agree.
Tolley was employed as an "alleyman," one of his duties being to
clean the peralta scrapers whenever a color change took place. Be-
fore August 1961, he had been reprimanded twice for failure prop-
erly to break up and spread waste wool which he had placed in the
1 No exceptions were filed to the Trial Examiner 's recommended dismissal of the alleged
Independent violations of Section 8(a)(1), and we shall therefore adopt the Trial Ex-
aminer 's findings and recommendations thereto pro forma.
2 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel
[ Chairman McCulloch and Members Leedom and Brown].
140 NLRB No. 40.