The Scrantonian Publishing Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 5, 1974

215 N.L.R.B. 296 (N.L.R.B. 1974)

296 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Scrantonian Publishing Co., Inc. & The Scranton
Republican Publishing Co. Inc ., Employer-Peti-
tioner and International Stereotypers & Electroty-
pers Union No. 73, AFL-CIO' and Graphic Arts
International Union , AFL-CIO, Local 241.2 Case
4-UC-67
December 5, 1974
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND
KENNEDY
On June 12, 1974, the Regional Director for Region
4 issued a Decision and Clarification of Bargaining
Unit in the above-entitled proceeding in which he
granted the Employer's request to clarify the units of
the Stereotypers and GAIU,3 finding that employees
operating certain "Merigraph" equipment constitute
an accretion to the Stereotypers unit and clarifying that
unit accordingly. There-fter, GAIU filed a timely re-
quest for review of the Regional Director's Decision on
the grounds that in making his clarification determina-
tion he departed from officially reported precedent and
made findings of fact which are clearly erroneous and
prejudicial to its rights.
By telegraphic order dated September 9, 1974, the
request for review was granted. Thereafter GAIU,
Stereotypers, and the Employer filed briefs on review.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the entire record in this
case with respect to the issues under review, including
the briefs on review, and makes the following findings:
In resolving the unit clarification request before him,
the Regional Director considered only factors which
the Board weighs in determining jurisdictional disputes
in proceedings arising under Section 10(k) of the Act.
On the basis of those factors he concluded that em-
ployees assigned to the Employer's new, "Merigraph
system" constitute an accretion to Stereotypers unit. In
its request for review GAIU did not object to the Re-
gional Director's treatment of the accretion issue
within this framework and argued only that he improp-
Hereinafter referred to as Stereotypers While this Union's designation
in the caption is in accord with its desires, we note that prior to the hearing
its parent, the International Stereotypers & Electrotypers Union, and the
International Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union merged to form the
International Printing and Graphic Communications Union, AFL-CIO
2 Hereinafter referred to as GAIU
3 Neither Stereotypers nor GAIU has been certified by the National
Labor Relations Board as the bargaining agent for employees in their resp',c-
tive units Each Union, however, is currently recognized by the Employee
in separate units, as described below
erly weighed the factors which he considered. The
briefs of both Stereotypers and the Employer argue that
the factors considered by the Regional Director neces-
sitate a finding that Stereotypers has "jurisdiction"
over the operation of the Merigraph system. As in
Schmidt's Printery," we granted the request for review
solely in order to determine from the record whether or
not the dispute between Stereotypers and GAIU was
susceptible of resolution under principles applicable to
unit clarification proceedings. For the reasons stated
below, our review of the record persuades us that the
Regional Director's clarification of the units involved
was improper.
The Employer is engaged in the printing, publica-
tion, and distribution of two newspapers, the Scran-
tonian and the Tribune. Both newspapers are printed
at the Employer's location at 338 West Washington
Avenue, Scranton, Pennsylvania. The Employer em-
ploys approximately 204 employees in various depart-
ments. The employees in each department are repre-
sented in a separate bargaining unit. The Stereotypers
and GAIU have for about 45 years represented units of
employees in the stereotype department and in the
camera and engraving department, respectively. The
Employer's latest collective-bargaining agreement with
Stereotypers ran from October 1, 1970, to September
30, 1973, and its latest agreement with GAIU ran from
February 22, 1971, to February 21, 1974. Although
both agreements had expired at the time of the hearing,
the Employer continued to operate under their terms,
and both Unions were negotiating new contracts with
the Employer.
The most recently expired agreement between the
Employer and Stereotypers defined the unit in terms of
work jurisdiction. Section 4 of the "Mutual Guaran-
tees" article therein stated:
It is further agreed that the Publishers will con-
tinue to recognize the Union 's claims to work pre-
sently done at the signing of this agreement, and
the Union 's jurisdiction will include all work
necessary to prepare and complete duplicate plates
for Letterpress printing . These processes shall not
include camera work . It is also understood that
[Stereotypers] will not invade the recognized juris-
diction of work now assigned to the crafts by con-
tractual agreement.
On February 13, 1974, the Employer and Stereotypers
executed a "Memorandum of Agreement" which
stated in relevant part:
That the jurisdiction clause set forth in Section
4 of the "Mutual Guarantees" articles of the col-
lective bargaining contract be expanded to include
4 213 NLRB No 58 (1974)
215 NLRB No. 36
SCRANTONIAN PUBLISHING CO 297
the production of plastic polymer plates by means
of the Merigraph system, and all equipment,
materials, duties, and work necessary thereto shall
be processed and completed by the employees cov-
ered by this contract
The recently expired agreement between the Em-
ployer and GAIU co;^tains a recognition provision
which states:
jit, Coi,amany recognizes Local #241 of the
[GAIIJ] as the exclusive representative for the
purpose of collective bargaining in respect to rates
of pay, hours of employment, or other conditions
of employment for all employees performing work
described in the Jurisdiction article of this cQp-
tract.
The jurisdiction provisions in GAIU's contract cover
photoengraving and its attendant work, and such work
is defined bioadly as:
[A]ll operations of the process pertaining to the
production of photoengraving plates, plates for
offset, and gravure cylinders and plates of any
substance or material from copy or from originals
and/or subjects when finished in lieu of copy up
to the finished product
Section 3 of article 4 sets out in considerable detail
various work and processes within GAIU's jurisdiction
and contains a provision that if the Employer installs
any equipment or adopts any work-processes as a sub-
stitute or evolution of work being done by photoen-
gravers, GAIU's jurisdiction will apply.
Prior to March 1974 the Employer utilized solely the
traditional "hot metal" process in its letterpress news-
paper printing operations. Thus, employees in the com-
posing room set news into type and, where required,
inserted engravings made in the engraving department.
A page of type and engravings so produced, called a
"chase," was then taken to the stereotype. department,
where, by application of pressure, it was imprinted onto
a cardboard-like mat. The mat was then dried and a
semicylindrical metal plate prepared from it. The plate
so prepared was then sent to the pressroom, to be
mounted on the press for the actual printing.
On or about August 13, 1973, the Employer notified
Stereotypers of its intent to convert from the hot metal
process to a direct printing process. This conversion
commenced on or about March 5, 1974, when the Em-
ployer received its first shipment of Merigraph equip-
ment. Approximately I week later the Employer as-
signed the seven employees in the stereotype
department to operate this new "Merigraph system."
Merigraph equipment has been placed in a separate
room located between the pressroom and the engraving
department. Limited production utilizing this equip-
ment began on or about March 19, 1974. As contem-
plated by the Employer this new method will com-
pletely replace the traditional hot metal process within
approximately 1 year after its introduction.
In the Merigraph system a photographic negative of
copy is placed in an exposure unit, and a liquid polymer
resin is then pumped into the unit. The negative is then
exposed to ultraviolet light which causes the resin to
become hardened in those areas corresponding to
transparent sections of the negative. The resulting
photopolymer plate is placed in a developing unit
where the unhardened resin is removed and the plate
is dried and further hardened. This plate is then
mounted directly onto a press'for printing. Hence the
need for mats, required in the "hot metal" stereotyping
process, is eliminated. The consequence of the Em-
ployer's installation of the Merigraph system in its op-
erations will be the elimination of the stereotype de-
partment. Much of the work of the camera and
engraving department will also be eliminated. Indeed,
whatever camera work will remain, the Employer plans
to integrate with the composing room, which will then
be renamed the photocomposing department.'
At the time of the hearing the Employer had em-
barked on its planned changes but was in the midst of
a transitional period. At this stage it continued to pro-
duce some plates in accordance with the traditional
method but it was also using come of the photopolymer
plates, produced by the Merigraph system, as mats
from which employees in the stereotyping department
made metal printing plates. Although it is true that, at
the time of the hearing, employees from the stereotyp-
ing department were operating the Merigraph system,
that they were receiving the same rate of pay and the
same fringe benefits as they had received for perform-
ing their stereotyping duties, that they were being su-
pervised by the stereotyping department foreman, and
they have been trained to operate the system, we note
certain countervailing factors. Thus, the training re-
ceived by the stereotypers would have been necessary
no matter which employees were chosen to operate the
system. Indeed, the Employer indicated that it might
train one or more of its present engravers (four in num-
ber) to operate the Merigraph plate producing system.
5 It appears from the record that in addition to converting its operations
to a direct printing method , the Employer is also eliminating hot type and
converting to a cold type process Thus , it intends to completely eliminate
its 17 or 18 linotype machines in the composing room In the new procedure
one or more of the eight keyboards used by the Employer produces a code
of tape which is fed into a photocomposing machine which reads the tape
and produces a strip of photographic paper with all the characters properly
spaced on the paper Employees of the camera department make up a
photopositor , or velox print , instead of a metal engraving, which is sent to
the composing room These photopositives or velox prints are then com-
bined with printed matter into page form A full page negative is made of
such a page It is this negative which is placed in the Merigraph system's
exposure unit as the first step in the production of a plastic printing plate
298 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Certain skills used in the operation of the Merigraph
system may be found in employees of both the Stereo-
typers and GAIU units . Stereotypers traditionally make
press plates . Employees in the engraving department
are skilled , inter aliq in camera work and in utilizing
magnifying glasses to examine the dot structure and
"line work" of metalic , etched plates . Employees who
operate the Merigraph system must use magnifying
glasses to examine the dot structure on the photopo-
lymer plates . In addition , the Merigraph system is,
according to the Employer , an "entirely new process"
which , when fully operational , will replace the stereo-
type department and the metal engraving operations
performed by the members of GAIU.
In light of the foregoing , especially the fact that the
stereotype department and the engraving operations of
the camera and engraving department will be elimi-
nated , that the operation of the Merigraph system re-
quires not only an amalgam of stereotyping and engrav-
ing skills but also extensive new skills , and that the
Merigraph system is a new operation utilizing new ma-
chinery and is located in a portion of the Employer's
facilities separate from its other departments and oper-
ations , we conclude that the disputed employees are not
an accretion to either Stereotypers or GAIU's existing
unit.' Rather , the issue of what unit representation, if
any, the disputed employees should have , presents a
question concerning representation , not one resolve by
this unit clarification proceeding in view of our finding
of no accretion . Accordingly, as there is no basis herein
for adding the employees operating the new Merigraph
system to either of the two aforementioned units in-
volved herein, we shall dismiss the Employer 's petition.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition for unit clarifi-
cation filed by The Scrantonian Publishing Co., Inc., &
the Scranton Republican Publishing Co., Inc., be and
it hereby is, dismilsed.
6 The fact that the contracts of both Stereotypers and GAIU, which define
the covered units in terms of work jurisdiction, ostensibly encompass work
of the type performed under the Merigraph system is not controlling herein,
as the Board makes its unit determination on the basis of community of
interest criteria not a union's juridictional claims. General Aniline Corpora-
tion, 89 NLRB 467 (1950); The Plumbing Contractors Association ofBal-
timore, Maryland, Inc., 93 NLRB 1081, 1087, fn. 21; Ross-Meehan Foun-
daries, 147 NLRB 207, 209 (1964).