The Citizen-News Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 26, 1940

21 N.L.R.B. 1112 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY, A CORPORATION and
Los ANGELES NEWSPAPER GIIILD
Case No. C-947.-Decided March 926, 1940
Newspaper Publishing Indusity-Interference , Restraint , and Coercion: dis-
paraging and criticising union, its policies , and activities ; criticism of use of
outside negotiation ; attempt to induce groups of employees to enter into
contracts ; criticism of use of outside negotiators and threat to reduce wages
when such employees refused to sign contract ; threat to discharge employees
if union with whom respondent was negotiating succeeded in its contract
proposals-Collective Bargaining : charge of refusal to bargain in good faith
dismissed where parties subsequently entered a satisfactory contract-Dis-
crv4nination : discharge ; charges of , dismissed as to four employees.
Mr. David Persinger, for the Board.
Mr. Willis Sargent and Mr. Frank B. Belcher, of Los Angeles,
Calif., for the respondent.
Mr. Carey McWilliams, of Los Angeles, Calif., and 111r. A. J.
.lsserman, of Newark, N. J., for the Guild.
Mr. William T. Little, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon charges and amended charges duly filed by Los Angeles
Newspaper Guild, herein called the Guild, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, herein called the Board, by the Regional Director for
the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California), issued its com-
plaint dated June 27, 1938, against The Citizen-News Company,i
a corporation, Hollywood, California, herein called the respondent,
alleging that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in
unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of
Section 8 (1), (3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. A copy
of the complaint and ,notice of hearing thereon was duly served upon
the respondent and the Guild.
IIn the complaint the respondent was denominated as Hollywood Citizen -News Com-
pany, a corporation At the hearing the designation was specifically corrected to that
appearing in the caption.
21 N. L. R. B., No. 110.
1112
THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1113
The complaint alleged, in substance, that the respondent (1) dis-
criminatorily discharged and refused to reinstate Roger C. Johnson,
Mellier G. Scott, Jr., Elizabeth Yeaman, Karl Schlichter, and Helen
Blair Thurlby,2 and did thereby discourage membership in a labor
organization; (2) refused to bargain collectively in good faith with
the Guild, the collective bargaining agency designated by the majority
of the employees in an appropriate unit; and (3) by the foregoing acts
interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. The respondent, in
its answer dated July 1, 1938, denied that it had engaged in or was
engaging in the alleged unfair labor practices.
Pursuant to notice duly served on the parties, a hearing was held at
Los Angeles, California, on July 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 12, 1938, before
George E. Kennedy, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the
Board. The Board, the respondent, and the Guild were represented
by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. On motion of
counsel for the Board, the complaint was dismissed without prejudice
as to Helen Blair Thurlby. During the course of the hearing the Trial
Examiner made several rulings on other motions and on objections to
the admission of evidence. At the close of the hearing, counsel for
the respondent made several motions to dismiss the complaint. The
Trial Examiner reserved ruling on the several motions and denied
them in his Intermediate Report. The-Board has reviewed the Trial
Examiner's rulings and finds that no prejudicial errors were com-
mitted. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On September 1, 1938, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate
Report, copies of which were duly served upon the parties, in which
he found that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in
unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (3), and
(5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, and recommended that the
respondent cease and desist from such unfair labor practices, that it
reinstate with back pay the four employees found to have been dis-
criminatorily discharged, that it bargain in good faith with the Guild
upon request, that it offer those employees who went on strike because
of the respondent's failure to bargain collectively immediate and full
reinstatement upon application, and that it take other affirmative
action remedial of the unfair labor practices.
On October 14 and 21, 1938, the Guild and the respondent filed their
respective exceptions to the Intermediate Report. Pursuant to notice,
a hearing for the purpose of oral argument was had before the Board
2 Incorrectly designated as Thurly in the complaint.
1114 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
at Washington, D. C., on October 5, 1939. The Guild appeared and
was represented by counsel. At oral argument, upon the request of
its counsel, the Guild was granted a week within which to file a motion
to reopen the record for the purpose of receiving' further evidence.
Thereafter the Guild requested and received an additional two weeks
within which to file such motion. On November 13, 1939, counsel for
the Guild notified the Board that it no longer desired to file such
motion. The Board has considered the exceptions to the Intermediate
Report and, in so far as they are inconsistent with the findings, con-
clusions, and order set forth below, finds them to be without merit.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The respondent is a California corporation, having its principal
office and place of business in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California.
The respondent owns, prints, and publishes the Hollywood Citizen-
News, herein called the Citizen-News, and the Hollywood Advertiser.
In addition, the respondent engages in job printing for commercial
establishments and other newspapers.
The average daily circulation of the Citizen-News is in excess of
26,000 copies, of which the out-of-State circulation amounts to 125
copies, or about one-half of 1 per cent. The respondent is a member
of the Associated Press and subscribes to the services of the United
Press, both of which maintain teletype machines at the respondent's
plant. The Associated Press has the privilege of using items of
news and intelligence collected and edited by the respondent's em-
ployees. The items of news collected outside the State of California
and transmitted to the respondent comprise approximately 21 per
cent of the reading matter of the Citizen-News. The respondent
subscribes to numerous syndicated services which supply materials
originating outside the State of California amounting to about 17
per cent of the reading matter of the Citizen-News. The revenue
derived from advertising originating outside the State amounts to
approximately 10 per cent of the total advertising revenue of the
Citizen-News, and more than 5 per cent of the respondent's total
revenue.
The respondent uses about 350 tons of newsprint per month, all
of which is shipped to the respondent from British Columbia,
Canada. The purchase of newsprint constitutes 20 per cent of the
total expenses of all the respondent's publications and 10 per cent
of the cost of publishing the Citizen-News.
THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
1115
Los Angeles Newspaper Guild, otherwise known as Chapter No. 69
of the American Newspaper Guild, is a labor organization affiliated
with the Committee for Industrial Organization,3 herein called the
C.'I. O. It admits to membership commercial, business, and editorial-
department employees of newspapers in Los Angeles and adjacent
counties. The Citizen-News unit of the Guild is a subdivision thereof
admitting to membership employees of the respondent employed in
the above-named departments.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Interference, restraint, and coercion
The record does not disclose the existence of any labor organization
or concerted activity among the respondent's employees prior to
July 1936. At that time a group of editorial employees petitioned
Harlan G. Palmer, the respondent's president, for a pay increase.
As a result individual conferences were arranged between Palmer
and the individual employees, but the subject of wage increases was
not discussed. Shortly thereafter, an item signed by Palmer appeared
in the "Office Gossip," a mimeographed paper published by the re-
spondent and distributed to the employees with their pay checks,
requesting that employees submit grievances concerning salary and
working conditions, and stating that if the grievances were dis-
allowed and the employees were still dissatisfied, they should seek
employment elsewhere. When Roger Johnson, an editorial employee,
expressed his dissatisfaction with the results of the conferences to
Harwood Young, the business manager of the Citizen-News, the latter
stated that Palmer was adverse to acting under suggestions from
"pressure groups."
In September and October 1936 the Los Angeles Chapter of The
American Newspaper Guild and the Citizen-News Chapter thereof
were organized. At various times thereafter certain supervisory
employees made disparaging remarks about the Guild. Thus Harold
Swisher, Harwood Young, and Harold Wynn, who are respectively
managing editor, business manager, and assistant business manager
of the Citizen-NeN-,,s, commented unfavorably on the Guild's emphasis
on "economics" rather than "ethics" in conversations with Roger
Johnson and James Crow, editorial employees of the Citizen-News.
Swisher, and at a later date, Harry Brandon, display advertising
manager of the Citizen-News, criticized Guild settlements of strikes,
the former saying that he did not see what had been achieved by the
3 Now the Congress of Industrial Organizations
1116 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
strikes and the latter, referring to a particular strike, stated that he
would be ashamed to belong to an organization that was party to such
a settlement.
In June 1937 the American Newspaper Guild held a convention at
which it voted, subject to a referendum, to join the C. I. O. and admit
non-editorial employees to membership. About this time Swisher in
speaking to Johnson questioned the advisability of the Guild's
affiliating with the C. I. O. Some time later, in the fall of 1937, in
connection with stories concerning strikes, he remarked to James
Lindsey, Herman Reuters, and John Watts, editorial employees and
Guild members who worked at the copy desk, that he believed in
unions, but thought that the C. I. O. was carrying things too far. He
inquired, "You fellows belong to the C. I. 0., don't you, the Guild?"
On one occasion after the Guild convention, Young asked Johnson
whether the Guild intended to organize the business department. At
another time, the date of which does not appear in the record, he
expressed the belief that the Guild should be limited to the editorial
department. In like vein, Harry Brandon told Johnson that he dis-
approved of unions for professional people. On one occasion the
manager of the classified advertising department told Karl Schlichter
that Palmer would never sign a union contract and that the editorial
employees were making a mistake seeking higher wages.
However, the burden of discouraging union activity among the
employees of the business department seems to have been taken up by
Brandon, the display advertising manager. In the course of his duties
as display advertising manager, he held meetings of the advertising
salesmen. He devoted several of these meetings exclusively to the
topic of unions, speaking critically on the subject of unions in general
and the Guild in particular. Specifically he complained that the
Guild had changed the newspapermen's attitude, that they had lost
interest in their work and only wanted to "put in eight hours, and
watch the clock." On another occasion, he complained that the white-
collar worker was caught between the business and laboring class and
prophesied that some day the white-collar workers "are going to get
ourselves some guns and go out and shoot those union bastards."
In October 1937 Brandon applied for membership in the Guild and
urged Johnson to secure his admission. The Guild refused to accept
him as a member, fearing that his move was an attempt to dominate
the Guild or at least the advertising salesmen in it. Shortly there-
after, at a meeting of the salesmen, Brandon remarked, "you fellows
have certainly tried to screw me up," and at another meeting a few
clays later, he said : "you are thinking too much of unions and not
doing your work." Late in October 1937, at another meeting at which
he again discussed unions, Brandon again complained that the men
THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1117
-,N ere not working hard enough and issued an order that they would
have to work on Saturdays, despite the fact that there was little to be
done in the department on that day. For a time thereafter the sales-
men were required to work on Saturdays. When Johnson complained
to Business Manager Young that the men felt that they were being
discriminated against because of their Guild activity, the latter
remarked that Brandon had a bad temper and had acted hastily and
promised to speak to Brandon to see what could be done about the
matter.
Thus for a period of over a year, the respondent conducted a cim-
paign of criticism and disparagement of the Guild. The purpose of
the campaign is made all the more apparent by virtue of its relative
intensity in the business department shortly before and after June
1937 when the Guild convention voted to extend its jurisdiction to
employees of that department.
In late June 1937, about the time of the Guild convention, at the
request of the respondent, committees representing the various de-
partments were formed by the employees and met with the respondent
to discuss wages, working conditions, and grievances. At these meet-
ings, the respondent proposed contracts to the various committees.
The business department entered into a contract, through its commit-
tee, but the editorial and the classified-advertising departments re-
fused. When the editorial-department employees informed Palmer
that they would not violate the Guild constitution and deal directly
with him through a committee, Palmer asked, "Don't you know what
you want? Can't you make up your own minds? Do you prefer to
have someone in Washington or New York or some place dictate
to you?" On several other occasions Young and Brandon also
commented unfavorably on the Guild's practice of using outside
negotiators.
When the classified-advertising department employees, being desir-
ous of acting through the Guild, refused to sign the contract offered
by the respondent, Young informed them that their salaries would
be the first to be reduced in the event that business decreased since
the other departments would be protected under their contracts.
While on one occasion this remark was made in answer to a question
of the employees, on another occasion it was entirely gratuitous.
Thus, while in 1936 the respondent discouraged collective activity,
in 1937 after the appearance of the Guild it encouraged the forma-
tion of bargaining committees and sought contractual relations with
them. It is apparent that the respondent altered its policy of deal-
ing with its employees in order to head off the organizational campaign
of the Guild.
1118 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On December 15, 1937, the Guild and the respondent commenced a
series of negotiations which continued over a period of 5 months. On
May 13, 1938, the parties tentatively agreed upon a contract. On
May 14 and 16 the respondent discharged five Guild members. A
strike ensued and the negotiations terminated.'
During the collective bargaining negotiations with the Guild,
the respondent sought to discuss matters directly with the employees
involved. Thus, the original contract proposed by the Guild pro-
vided that no reporter should do photographic work. During the
discussion of that provision at a meeting between Palmer and the
negotiators, Selby Calkins, an employee who had previously been
assigned to such tasks, and who was present as an observer, was
called upon to express his opinion. He stated that he was desirous
of performing only reportorial work. In discussing the matter,
C. H. Garrigues, the executive secretary of the Guild, used the
words "speed-up" and "stretch-out." The following day when Cal-
kins was waiting to make a telephone call, Swisher, the managing
editor, remarked that the "speed-up" and "stretch-out" did not
appear to be disturbing him. A few moments later when Calkins
passed his desk, Swisher said, "Jake, I don't understand you."
Upon questioning by Calkins, he admitted that he had reference
to Calkins' statement at the conference. Swisher thereupon sought
to discuss other matters involved in the contract, but desisted
promptly upon request. In similar vein, Swisher informed Alex-
ander Swan, an editorial employee that if the Guild continued the
contract negotiations, he would be negotiating himself out of a job
inasmuch as retrenchment would be necessary if concessions were
made to the Guild. Swisher also made a similar remark about Swan
to Crow. On another occasion Young told Schlichter, a business-
department employee who was subsequently discharged, that the
progressive wage scale and severance pay provisions of the proposed
contract would cause discharges and that Stanley Speer and one
other employee would lose their jobs. The foregoing statements of
supervisory employees were plainly calculated to destroy the prestige
of the Guild and inculcate in the minds of the employees the fear
that the efforts of their representatives would be profitless.
We find that by the continuing expressions of criticism and dis-
paragement of the Guild, the criticism of the use of outside negotia-
tors, the attempt to secure contracts with employees' committees in
the various departments, the threat to cut wages in the event that
the classified-advertising employees failed to sign a contract, and
the threat to discharge employees if a contract with the Guild was
4 The question of whether the discharges were discriminatory or whether the respe ad-
ent's actions constituted a refusal to bargain in good faith is discussed below.
THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1119
consummated, the respondent interfered with, restrained, and
coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in
Section 7 of the Act.
B. The alleged refusal to bargain
The complaint alleges in substance that the respondent failed to
bargain in good faith with the Guild. Between December 22, 1937,
when the parties held their first bargaining conference, and
May 13, 1938, when they held their last, the respondent met with
the Guild on at least nine occasions, agreed to many of the Guild's
proposals, and submitted four counterproposals. On May 13, 1938,
the parties agreed upon a contract subject to the approval of the
Citizen-News unit of the Guild and the international union. The
contract contained provisions for wages and hours, severance in-
demnity, overtime, and other conditions of work; and appears to have
been satisfactory to the Guild and the employees affected.
On many occasions during negotiations Palmer indicated that the
adoption of many of the Guild proposals would necessitate the dis-
,;harge of several employees. At the meeting of May 13, after all
the terms of the contract had been agreed upon, Palmer informed
the negotiators that he intended to discharge three employees and
offered to furnish their names to the Guild. On May 14 and 16
Johnson, Scott, Yeaman, Thurlby, and Schlichter were discharged.
On May 14, following the discharge of Johnson, Scott, and Yeaman,
the Guild voted to strike. On May 17, upon the respondent's re-
fusal to reinstate these employees, the Guild members went out on
strike. At the' time of the hearing the strike was still in effect
and the contract had not been ratified.
During the oral argument before the Board, counsel for the Guild
stated that "In July 1938, there was a strike settlement and the
publishers signed the agreement . . . which had not been executed
at the time the strike was called." We find below that the discharges
did not constitute unfair labor practices.
We do not find that the respondent failed to bargain in good
faith with the Guild within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act.
C. The discharges
On May 14 and 16, the respondent discharged five employees.
The complaint alleges that the employees were discriminatorily dis-
charged because of union membership and activity. The respond-
ent contends that its action was impelled by a decline in business
which rendered a policy of retrenchment advisable.
'The respondent and the Guild bargained on behalf of the employees in the editorial
department It was not disputed that during the negotiations the Guild represented a
majority of the respondent 's employees in this department
1120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Palmer testified that business started to decrease in August 1937,
reached its low in December 1937, and continued at that level until
the time of the discharges. In support of this statement, the
respondent showed that the operations of the Citizen-News which
had yielded a profit of $27,000 for the first 5 months of 1937, showed
a loss of $1,800 for the same period of 1938. Display-advertising
revenues of the respondent had fallen from $170,000 during the first
4 months of 1937 to $150,000 in the corresponding period of 1938.
In short, according to Palmer, expenses increased and income de-
creased. Thus early in the negotiations, Palmer informed the
negotiators that a policy of retrenchment might become necessary
because of economic conditions. Again, at the meeting of May 13,
he informed the negotiators that he intended to discharge three
employees and inquired if they wanted to know the names of the
three. The negotiators replied in the negative saying that if the
discharges were being made for the purposes of economy, they were
not concerned. According to Palmer, he determined to effect the
desired economies by reducing the amount of reading matter in the
paper as well as the size of the staff. The amount of reading matter
was reduced sometime in March or April. He testified that he
decided to delay the staff reductions until a time when all other
matters were agreed upon, in order that such discharges might not
disturb the negotiations.
Editorial Department. At the outset, it should be noted that all
the employees in the respondent's editorial department were members
of the Guild, and accordingly the fact that all the discharged em-
ployees were members thereof is of little importance. Palmer testi-
fied that his original plan was to reduce the editorial-department pay
roll by $150, that he selected his assistant, Scott, and then determined
that he could best spare one general reporter and one member of the
drama department. For the reasons stated below, he determined to
discharge Yeaman and Johnson.
Mellier Scott, employed chiefly as an editorial writer and editor
of the readers' letters column, worked directly under Palmer. He
was not a particularly active Guild member. In March 1938, when
he requested a leave of absence, Palmer informed him that although
there was nothing to prevent it, he could not guarantee him or any-
one else a job 2 months hence because of business conditions. Palmer
testified that he decided to take over Scott's work himself, and thus
'riot unduly curtail the managing editor's staff.
Elizabeth Yeaman was an active Guild member, having served as
secretary-treasurer of the Citizen-News unit of the Guild. At the
conference between Palmer and the editorial employees in June 1937,
at which Palmer proposed a contract, she answered Palmer's query
of whether they were not capable of bargaining for themselves with
THE CITIZEN -NEWS COMPANY 1121
the statement that newspapermen were not and never had been capa-
ble of bargaining for themselves. A few days later her title of
drama editor was taken from her and given to Crow. She admits,
however, that Crow had theretofore been performing the editor's
functions without the title. Upon her inquiring of Palmer whether
or not he considered her demoted, a stormy session ensued in which
Palmer cursed and swore at her and at the conclusion of which he
informed her that if she should receive an offer of another position
she should feel free to accept it. Thereafter Swisher urged Crow
on several occasions to take over certain duties in connection with
the drama department as his prerogative as editor. Palmer testified
that, having determined to discharge one of the two drama-depart-
ment employees, his choice lay between Crow, the president of the
Citizen-News unit of the Guild, and Yeaman, its secretary-treasurer;
that Crow was better at technical matters of make-up and caption
writing, a fact admitted by Yeaman herself; and that Yeaman's,
work as a columnist was to a certain extent paralleled by syndicated
columns to which the respondent subscribed.
Roger Johnson was perhaps the most active Guild member in the
respondent's employ. He was one of the founders and had served as
the first president of the Los Angeles Chapter of the American News-
paper Guild, and at the time of his discharge was a vice president
thereof. The management frequently spoke to him about matters
concerning the Guild rather than to the officers of the local unit
and many of the statements outlined in Section III A, above, were
directed to Johnson. In the course of his employment Johnson wrote
a great number of feature stories and also covered the meetings of
various breakfast and luncheon clubs. When the respondent reduced
Ole amount of reading matter, it considerably reduced the amount of
feature stories and eliminated the coverage of several of the eating
clubs. Palmer testified that having decided to discharge one of the
three general reporters, his choice lay between Johnson, Simonton,
and Calkins. Calkins was an active Guild member, having served as
acting treasurer of the Citizen-News unit and as a member of one of
the Guild negotiating committees. Simonton was a delegate to the
local C.I.O. Unit Council. According to Palmer's uncontradicted
testimony, Simonton was the best reporter of the group. He further
testified that Calkins' ability as a photographer and his greater versa-
tility made Johnson the logical choice for discharge. Although
Calkins was not assigned to the duties of a relief photographer in the
schedule of assignments that the respondent posted on May 14, the
schedule was an informal one.
Business Department. Palmer testified that, in accordance with his
retrenchment policy, he requested Young to estimate the value of all
the employees working in his department and recommend discharges-
1122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and that Young recommended the discharge of Thurlby and Schlich-
ter. Since the Trial Examiner, on motion of counsel for the Board,
dismissed the complaint as to Thurlby without prejudice, we are no
longer concerned with her case. Karl Schlichter was engaged pri-
marily in preparing statistics concerning the Hollywood market
area. Palmer testified that in the past the respondent had operated
without anyone performing Schlichter's function, that national ad-
vertising, with which Schlichter's activities were primarily concerned,
had decreased 40 per cent, and that it was accordingly a logical move
to discharge him. There is no evidence that Schlichter was a par-
ticularly active member of the Guild.
Conclusions. Business conditions had long warranted a policy of
retrenchment. Although the respondent delayed putting such policy
into effect until the time the contract was submitted for ratification,
it warned the employees of its intentions on several occasions prior
thereto. Had it desired to disrupt and terminate negotiations as
alleged in the complaint, we see no reason why the same discharges
made during the course of the negotiations would not have been
equally effective. The respondent's explanation that it delayed to
avoid disrupting and terminating negotiations is reasonable. There
is no evidence that the retrenchment was excessive, or that new em-
ployees were hired to take the place of the discharged employees.6
The sole question remaining is whether the respondent discrim-
inated in selecting the employees to be discharged in order to dis-
courage union activity. In the editorial department, all employees
were members of the Guild, and accordingly membership in the
Guild, alone, is insufficient to show discrimination. No other rea-
son is offered to substantiate the charge of discrimination in the case
of Scott. Johnson and Yeaman were officers of the Guild and active
therein. However, the respondent has given a reasonable explana-
tion for its choice and the other employees whom the respondent
would have been required to discharge as an alternative to the two
selected were also active Guild members. The quarrel between Yea-
man and Palmer, though acrimonious at the time, occurred about
a year before the discharge. Although the Guild did not have
unanimous membership in the business department of the Citizen-
News, the choice of Schlichter, whose job was a newly created one
and whose work was not immediately productive in a concrete way,
was not an unreasonable move for an employer to make when faced
with losses and the need for retrenchment.
We find that the respondent has not discriminated in regard to
the hire and tenure of employment of Roger C. Johnson, Mellier G.
Scott, Jr., Elizabeth Yeaman, and Karl Schlichter to discourage
membership in the Guild.
The strike was still in progress at the time of the hearing.
THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1123
IV THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
We find that the activities of the respondent set forth in Section
III A, above, occurring in connection with the operations of the
respondent described in Section I above, have a close, intimate, 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.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the respondent has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices, we will order that it cease and desist from such prac-
tices and, to effectuate the purposes of the Act, we will order the
respondent to post notices stating that it will so cease and desist.
The respondent's employees will thus be assured that they may exer-
cise the rights guaranteed by the Act without fear of interference,
restraint, or coercion.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the
entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Los Angeles Newspaper Guild is a labor organization, within
the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the re-
spondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices,
within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor prac-
tices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and
(7) of the Act.
4. The respondent has not discriminated in regard to the hire and
tenure of employment of Roger C. Johnson, Mellier J. Scott, Jr.,
Elizabeth Yeaman, and Karl Schlichter, and has not thereby dis-
couraged membership in a labor organization, within the meaning
of Section 8 (3) of the Act.
5. The respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices,
within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of
law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, 'the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the
respondent, The Citizen-News Company, a corporation, and its
officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall :
1124 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1. Cease and desist from in any manner interfering with, restrain-
ing, or coercing its employees in the exercise of the right to self-
organization , to form, join , or assist labor organizations , to bargain
collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to
engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargain-
ing and other mutual aid and protection , as guaranteed in Section 7
of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Immediately post notices in conspicuous places throughout its
plant and maintain such notices for a period of at least sixty (60)
consecutive days, stating that the respondent will cease and desist in
the manner aforesaid;
(b) Notify the Regional Director for the Twenty -first Region in
writing within ten (10 ) days from the date of this Order what
steps the respondent has taken to comply herewith.
AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the allegations of the complaint
charging the respondent with engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8 ( 3) and ( 5) of the Act be, and they
hereby are, dismissed, but that such dismissal of the allegations which
respect to violations of Section 8 (3) of the Act shall be without
prejudice to any and all rights of Helen Blair Thurlby.