The Washington Post Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 14, 1981

254 N.L.R.B. 168 (N.L.R.B. 1981)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Washington Post Company, Employer-Petition-
er and The Washington-Baltimore Newspaper
Guild, Local 35, a/w The Newspaper Guild,
AFL-CIO-CLC. Case 5-UC-90
January 14, 1981
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS
PENELLO AND TRUESDALE
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(b) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Albert W.
Palewicz. 1 Following the close of the hearing, and
pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as
amended, the Regional Director for Region 5
transferred this proceeding to the Board for deci-
sion. Thereafter, the Employer-Petitioner and the
Union filed briefs, and subsequently filed answering
briefs.
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 reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They are hereby af-
firmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The parties stipulated that The Washington
Post Company (the Employer), a Delaware corpo-
ration, is engaged at its Washington, D.C., location
in the publication and distribution of a daily and
Sunday newspaper distributed directly to the Dis-
trict of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia, and other
States. They also stipulated that during the 12-
month period immediately prior to the hearing in
Case 5-RC-9593, a representative period,2 the Em-
ployer received revenues in excess of $500,000.
The Employer is a member of and subscriber to
various interstate news services and regularly car-
ries in its publication advertisements of nationally
sold products. Based on these facts, we find the
Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the pur-
poses of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The parties stipulated that the Guild is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the Act.
I This hearing extended over 91 hearing dates, encompassing more
than 10,650 pages of transcript, and numerous exhibits.
2 The parties stipulated that the record in Case 5-RC-9593 be included
as part of the record in the instant case.
254 NLRB No. 14
3. The Post seeks by its unit clarification petition
to exclude from the unit described below approxi-
mately 156 individuals as either supervisory, man-
agerial, or confidential employees. The Guild con-
tends that all 156 individuals are properly included
in the certified unit which it presently represents.
That unit is described as:
All employees employed by the Washington
Post in its editorial, news, advertising, circula-
tion, and business departments at its Washing-
ton, D.C. location, but excluding all other em-
ployees, confidential employees, managerial
employees, guards and supervisors as defined
in the Act.
The history of collective bargaining between the
Post and the Guild extends back to 1936 when the
Post voluntarily recognized the Guild. Contracts
between the parties were successfully negotiated
thereafter with the most recent contract extending
from May 2, 1974, to March 31, 1976. Subsequent-
ly, in Case 5-RC-9593, the Washington Newspaper
Union filed a timely petition for an election, seek-
ing to represent certain employees at the Post who
were represented by the Guild. The Guild inter-
vened in that proceeding based on its contractual
interest, and, after a hearing on the petition, an
election was held in the unit described above. The
results of that election showed that the Guild was
selected by unit employees to represent them in
collective bargaining.3 The Post then filed the in-
stant unit clarification petition.
1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES
Initially, the Guild moves to dismiss the instant
petition. The Guild asserts that since the positions
the Post seeks to exclude from the unit have long
existed, and since the job duties of these positions
have not been changed, there are no grounds upon
which to clarify these positions out of the unit. The
Guild further argues that, by virtue of a United
States District Court order,4 the 1974-76 agree-
ment between the parties was still in effect at the
time the Post filed the unit clarification petition,
and thus the present petition is untimely. The
Guild further contends that processing this petition
would be destructive of the parties' collective-bar-
gaining relationship which has existed for over 40
years.
We do not agree with the Guild's arguments.
The Act provides specifically for the exclusion of
I This was the first time the Guild had been certified by the Board as
the representative of employees of the Post.
4 Washington-Ballimore Newspaper Guild Local 35 of the Newspaper
Guild, AFL-C1O-CLC v. The Washington Post Company, 442 F.Supp.
1060 (D.C.D.C. 1977).
168
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
"supervisors." And, it is well settled that manage-
rial and confidential employees similarly are to be
excluded from bargaining units. 6 Thus, except in
certain limited and well-defined factual situations,
the Board, when presented with an appropriate pe-
tition or claim, is required to exclude positions
from a bargaining unit where the inclusion of those
positions would violate the principles of the Act. 7
While it may be that certain of the positions sought
to be excluded by a unit clarification petition have
long been included under previous contracts, and
the job duties of those positions have remained un-
changed, nonetheless, if it can be shown that the
persons in such positions meet the test for establish-
ing supervisory, managerial, or confidential status,
we are compelled to exclude them. For example, in
Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Engineers,8
the employees whom the employer sought to ex-
clude had been represented for over 40 years in the
unit, and their job duties had not changed signifi-
cantly in that time. The union, maintaining that
none of the job classifications should be removed
from the unit, argued that the "bargaining history
which has included all of the classifications should
be persuasive." 9 In response, the Board stated that,
although "in certain circumstances when determin-
ing the scope of the appropriate unit weight is
given to bargaining history and to the prior agree-
ments of the parties, such factors are not determi-
native of the status of disputed employee categories
whose exclusion may be required because of the
statute or for policy reasons." 0 The posture of the
instant case is similar to that of Brotherhood of Lo-
comotive Firemen, and we believe a similar result
should obtain here.' 1 Of course, a history of inclu-
5 Sec. 2(3) of the Act.
6 See General Dynamics Corporation, Convair Aerospace Division. San
Diego Operations, 213 NLRB 851 (1974); N.LR.B. v. Bell Aerospace Com-
pony. Division of Textron, Inc., 416 U.S. 267 (1974).
1 See Peerless Publications. Inc., 190 NLRB 658, 659 (1971); compare
Northwest Publications. Inc., d/b/a San Jose Mercury and San Jose News,
200 NLRB 105 (1972); Wallace-Murray Corporation Schwitzer Division,
192 NLRB 1090 (1972).
8 145 NLRB 1521 (1964).
9 Id. 145 NLRB at 1525.
10 Id. 145 NLRB at 1525, fn. 10. Also in the Brotherhood of Locomotive
Firemen case, the Board determined that, although an employer did not
question the representative status of a union and no other union sought to
represent the employees involved, the Board could decide the placement
of employees whose status was in dispute through the clarification pro-
cess, even though the unit had not been Board-certified. The employer in
that case filed an RM petition, but the Board treated the petition "in
effect" as a motion for clarification. The Board noted that if it "were to
refuse to determine the unit placement of the contested employees, it]
would be exacerbating a dispute which reached [it] in the first place be-
cause the parties could not settle it themselves." 145 NLRB at 1524.
" See also A.D. T Company. Inc., 177 NLRB 704 (1969) (30-year bar-
gaining history; employer sought exclusion of 5 classifications occupied
by 94 individuals from unit represented by union because they were al-
leged supervisors under Sec. 2(11) of the Act); The Western Colorado
Power Company, 190 NLRB 564 (1971) (30-year bargaining history; em-
ployer requested clarification by specific exclusion of 133 employees in
numerous job classifications, contending individuals involved were super-
sion in the bargaining unit for many years may be
evidence that such a classification in fact is proper-
ly included in the unit. If there are no changed cir-
cumstances in terms of job duties, this, too, may
constitute evidence on the status of the individuals
sought to be excluded. 12
With respect to the petition before us, we note
that it was filed immediately following the election
held in the unit described above, which specifically
excludes all "confidential employees, managerial
employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the
Act." Thus, it is clear that the petition is timely
under Board precedent.' 3 Moreover, despite the
Guild's assertion that the unit found appropriate by
the Regional Director for Region 5 in the recent
election in Case 5-RC-9593 was identical to the
contractually recognized unit,' 4 the fact remains
that the Board-certified unit excludes supervisors,
managerial, and confidential employees.'5 Further-
more, the Employer here, as discussed below,
never indicated an intention to abandon its unit
composition contentions introduced at the hearing
in Case 5-RC-9593.' 6 As we have discussed
above, dismissal of the petition filed here is not
warranted, because of the statutory issues in-
volved, 7 and the timely filing of the petition.
visors; Board rejected union's argument that petition should be dismissed
because unit was covered by an unexpired contract).
*2 See, e.g., McAlester Hospital Foundation, Inc., d/b/a McAlester Gen-
eral Hospital, 233 NLRB 589 (1977), where the Board concluded that the
disputed employees were intended to be included in the unit, but, in so
deciding, placed the burden on the employer, which wanted to exclude
the employees, to demonstrate that they were statutory supervisors at the
time of the stipulation or that circumstances had changed justifying their
exclusion. The employer's prior agreement that the disputed employees
were not statutory employees at the time of the stipulation, although not
controlling, was found by the Board to be "considerable in assessing any
conflict that may arise" out of contrasting testimony. Id. 233 NLRB 589,
fn. 1. See also Peerless Publications Inc., 190 NLRB 658 (1971).
Is Cases cited by the Union are inapposite on this issue. In Arthur C
Logan Memorial Hospital, 231 NLRB 778 (1977); Northwest Publications.
Inc.. d/b/a San Jose Mercury and San Jose News, 197 NLRB 213 (1972)
and 200 NLRB 105 (1972); and Wallace-Murray Corporation, Schwitzer Di-
vision, 192 NLRB 1090 (1971), the Board, although stating it did not want
to disturb the bargaining relationship between the parties, further noted
that the petitions for clarification were untimely. Thus, in Arthur C.
Logan Memorial Hospital, for example, the Board dismissed a clarification
petition filed after a contract had been agreed to. The Board, noting that
the filing of UC petitions has not been limited only to the open period,
nevertheless found that to permit such a course soon after contract exten-
sion was "necessarily destructive of the bargaining relationship." (231
NLRB at 779.) Significantly, the Board dismissed the petition without
prejudice to its being filed at an appropriate time.
" The Regional Director stated, at fn. 2 of his Decision and Direction
of Election, that the units were the same.
5 Cf. McAlester General Hospital supra, 233 NLRB at 589, fn. .
'6 Cf. WNYS--TV (WIXTJ, 239 NLRB 170 (1978); Arthur C Logan
Memorial Hospital, supra.
l The Union's reliance on Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Company,
211 NLRB 1021 (1974), is misplaced. In that case, the Board dismissed a
UC petition because the employer sought by means of clarification to
decide a work assignment dispute. While the Board noted in a "more-
over" argument that to do as the employer requested would result in
"radical change" in a 30-year bargaining history between the ORTT and
CWA bargaining units, a similar dispute is not presented in this case. Fi-
Continued
169
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Apart from the considerations discussed above,
there are other reasons for processing the instant
petition. The peculiar genesis of this case shows
that the Employer attempted to exclude some of
the classifications involved here in an earlier unit
clarification petition in Case 5-UC-72 (1975). That
petition was dismissed by the Regional Director for
Region 5 as untimely because it was filed during
the mid-term of a then existing collective-bargain-
ing agreement.'8 The Board, by telegraphic order,
denied the Employer's request for review of the
Regional Director's action. Thereafter, in 1976, as
noted above, the Washington Newspaper Union
filed a petition in Case 5-RC-9593, seeking to rep-
resent certain employees at the Post. That petition
encompassed virtually the identical unit then repre-
sented by the Guild. At the hearing on that peti-
tion, the Post, while agreeing that the scope of the
petitioned-for unit generally was appropriate, an-
nounced that it intended to contest the inclusion of
certain classifications during the hearing as either
supervisory, managerial, and/or confidential.
Indeed, the hearing there proceeded on this basis;
i.e., the Post began presenting evidence on the
status of the individuals whom it claimed should be
excluded from any Board-certified unit. Both the
Guild and the Washington Newspaper Union were
given the opportunity to cross-examine Post wit-
nesses, and the Guild indicated that it intended to
contest each category which the Post wished to ex-
clude. By the fifth day of the hearing, the Wash-
ington Newspaper Union requested that the hear-
ing on unit placement issues be postponed so that
the employees sought in its petition for election
could exercise their right to vote on the selection
or rejection of a bargaining representative. After
deliberation, the Post agreed to a proposal of the
Regional Director for Region 5, as proffered by
the Hearing Officer, that an election be held at
which the Post would not challenge those it
claimed to be properly excluded from the unit but
after which, if necessary, the Regional Director
would entertain an appropriate unit clarification pe-
tition. The Guild, while not acceding to the stipula-
tion to hold the election agreed upon by the Post
and the Washington Newspaper Union, did not
nally, Union Electric Company, 217 NLRB 666 (1975), does not warrant a
contrary result. In that case, the Board dismissed a UC petition filed by a
union which sought to include employees who had historically been ex-
cluded from the unit. Moreover, the Board itself indicated at fn. 5 of that
decision that a "possible" exception to its principle of refusing to clarify
longstanding units would be a situation involving agreed inclusion of in-
dividuals who were not employees within the meaning of the Act, citing
Wallace-Murray and Peerless Publications. And this exception is the one
involved here.
is See, e.g., Northwest Publications, supra.
appeal or request review of the Regional Director's
actions. 9
In these circumstances, it is clear that, but for
the Regional Director's proposals and the subse-
quent election, the earlier hearing in the RC pro-
ceeding would have continued and the Post would
have been permitted to present its case on the unit
placement issues. The instant UC petition is thus
clearly an offshoot of the earlier RC hearing.2 0 It
cannot be seriously disputed that the Post's acqui-
escence in the Hearing Officer's proposal was
proper at the time of the RC hearing. In light of
the earlier representations made by the Regional
Director, we are satisfied that the unit clarification
process is now a proper vehicle for a resolution of
the issues presented. 2 ' We thus proceed to a deter-
mination of those issues. 2 2
19 To summarize the agreement, we note the following colloquy at the
hearing:
[The Hearing Officer] Pursuant to our discussions of a few mo-
ments ago, I placed a call to the Regional Director in Baltimore, and
the Regional Director in that telephone conversation has authorized
me to state that at this point he does not see any impediment to his
entertaining the filing and processing of a UC petition after the issu-
ance of a decision and direction of election and a subsequent certifi-
cation after the election.
Also, he sees no impediment to the incorporation of the record so
far developed in this RC case as part of the UC record as far as that
record is pertinent ....
HEARING OFtICER: The hearing will be in order.
As the parties are already aware from my off-the-record discus-
sions with them, I have communicated with the Regional Director
again, since the last recess.
He has told me to state that he stands on what he has already said,
that is, the statement I read just a few minutes ago regarding his po-
sition about the entertaining of the filing and processing of a UC pe-
tition after the issuance of a decision and direction of election and
subsequent certification following the election.
Mr. O'Brien [the Post's counsel], do you have a statement to
make?
Mr. O'Brien: Yes, sir.
In view of all the foregoing, the Post accepts the Regional Direc-
tor's proposals and representations made heretofore in this hearing,
and in consideration therefore hereby foregoes the presentation of
any further evidence at this time.
20 Although it appears from the record that the parties have occasion-
ally bargained over the status and placement of various classifications in-
volved here, this factor does not bar the Post from filing its petition here.
See fn. 11.
2l As noted, the Guild asserts that a decision of the district court in
Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild v. Washington Post, supra, fn. 4,
renders the petition in this case untimely since the court ruled that the
1974-76 agreement between the parties was still in effect at the time of
the filing of the petition. We do not read the case as standing for such a
proposition. Rather, in agreement with the Employer, we believe the
issue in that case, as found by the court, was "whether arbitration is man-
dated pursuant to the expired contract." (96 LRRM 3139, fn. I.) (Empha-
sis supplied.) That terms of a contract may continue during negotiation
for a new contract does not deprive the Board of jurisdiction of a dispute
such as that involved here. The Union's suggestion in its brief that the
issues here might possibly be decided through arbitration could not be
seriously considered because the issue of statutory status is a matter for
the Board to determine. See Cincinnati Bell, Inc., 227 NLRB 1930 (1977);
William Transportation Company, 233 NLRB 837 (1977).
22 The Guild obtained a subpoena duces tecum in this case, seeking
from the Post various items including, inter alia, certain wage rates, disci-
Continued
170
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
Background
Essentially, the Employer's petition seeks to clar-
ify out of the certified unit employees who work in
three major departments. These are the business
and news departments, where the majority of the
positions at issue are located, and the editorial de-
partment. The Company asserts that various posi-
tions are managerial, 23 supervisory, 24 or confiden-
tial2 5 positions under the Act. We proceed first to
the categories at issue in the business depart-
ments. 2 6 In doing so, we note the following de-
partments under the business department umbrella
which have categories in dispute here: advertising,
circulation, promotion, administrative services, data
processing, advance systems research, insurance,
employee relations, and accounting.
plinary letters, and contracts with dealers. The Guild asserts that the Post
has not complied fully with that subpena or, alternatively, that the Board
should ignore evidence presented by the Post covering facts sought by
the subpena. Over 200 exhibits were introduced into evidence in this
case. It appears that the Guild's dispute essentially centers on wage data
requested. The Guild points to an administrative law judge's decision
wherein the Post was found to have violated Sec. 8(aXS) of the Act by
not providing such wage information during negotiations. See The Wash-
ington Post Company, 237 NLRB 1493 (1977).
In determining the supervisory, managerial, or confidential status of
employees, the Board has long held that the important consideration in
determining such status is the actual facts relating to job performance.
For example, titles or job description do not confer status. Golden West
Broadcasters-KTLA, 215 NLRB 760, 761 (1974); Sol Henkind, an Individ-
ual d/b/a Greenpark Care Center. formerly known as Willoughby Health
Related Facility, 231 NLRB 753 (1977). While wage data may be some-
what probative of status, it is never conclusive or determinative. See Fred
Rogers Company, 226 NLRB 1160, 1161 (1976). To the extent such data is
exclusively relied on by the Post in support of its contentions, we would
not find such evidence dispositive of the issue under consideration. We
also note that the Guild was permitted to examine witnesses on their
wages, and on the Post's wage structure generally. Moreover, review of
the Post's arguments concerning the status of individuals reveals little, if
any, reliance on disparity in wages.
The Guild further asserts that the Hearing Officer erred in rejecting
several Guild exhibits as essentially untimely. We do not believe the
Hearing Officer erred in this regard, but, even were we to consider the
exhibits (which were placed in the record as "rejected exhibits") our con-
clusions on the unit placement issue discussed below would not differ. Fi-
nally, the Guild asserts that credibility resolutions are required here.
However, the Board ordinarily does not make credibility resolutions in
determining unit issues, and finds it unnecessary to do so here.
3s "Managerial employees" have been defined as those who have au-
thority to formulate, determine, or effectuate employer policies by ex-
pressing and making operative the decisions of their employer. See, e.g.,
Eastern Camera and Photo Corp., 140 NLRB 569 (1963); N.LR.B. v. Bell
Aerospace, supra.
24 Sec. 2(11) of the Act defines the term "supervisor" as:
The term "supervisor" means any individual having authority, in
the interest of the employer, to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall,
promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or
responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effective-
ly to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the
exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical
nature, but requires the use of independent judgment.
2" "Confidential employees" are those employees who "assist and act
in a confidential capacity to persons who formulate, determine, and effec-
tuate management policies in the field of labor relations." The B. F. Good-
rich Company, 115 NLRB 722, 724 (1956); Kleinberg, Kaplan, Wolff,
Cohen & Burrows PC., 253 NLRB No. 54 (1980).
26 We note preliminarily that in all instances wherein we decide that
an employee should be excluded on one basis in this case, we find it un-
necessary to consider alleged alternative bases for exclusion.
II. THE BUSINESS DEPARTMENTS
A. Advertising Department
The Employer maintains an advertising depart-
ment which is responsible for the sale and produc-
tion of all advertising in the Post. It has five subdi-
visions (also referred to as departments): retail,
classified, general, administration, and customer re-
lations. These five departments fall under the over-
all authority of the vice president for advertising,
Robert McCormick. The Company asserts that var-
ious managers, directors, and "supervisors" in the
advertising department are managerial, supervisory,
or confidential employees under the Act who
should be excluded from the unit.
1. Retail Advertising: Manager Joseph Arcaro and
Assistant Manager John Bowen are in charge of
the retail advertising department. They are ex-
cluded from the unit by agreement of the parties.
There are also three zone sales managers, a chain
and department store manager, and a commissioned
sales manager within the retail advertising depart-
ment. The Employer claims these five sales manag-
ers are either supervisory or managerial employees
under the Act.
The positions of the three zone sales managers
and the chain and department store manager were
created in 1974.27 The Employer and the Union
agree that these managers perform similar functions
in soliciting and processing advertisements from
retail establishments in their respective zones. The
three zone managers operate from Kensington,
Maryland; Annandale, Virginia; and the Post
Building in the District of Columbia, respectively.
The chain and department store manager has an
office in the District of Columbia. Working under
each of these managers are approximately 5 to 15
sales representatives, and 2 to 3 secretaries or
clerks. In addition, several artists work in the zone
sales offices in Maryland and Virginia, and several
telephone salespersons work in the District zone
sales office.
The sales representatives in each zone are as-
signed to work in a particular geographic area.
These geographic assignments initially were set up
in 1974, upon the departments' reorganization, by
the excluded retail advertising manager. Since then,
the sales managers have been responsible for geo-
graphic assignments, although those placement de-
cisions have also been discussed with the retail ad-
vertising manager prior to their implementation.
While the sales managers do not involve them-
selves in the actual selling of advertising, which is
the function of the sales representatives, it appears
27 The commissioned sales manager position will be discussed below.
171
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that up to one-quarter of a sales manager's working
time is spent in dealing with advertisers regarding
advertising placement or costs.
The zone sales managers and the chain and de-
partment store manager do not hire or discharge
employees in their zones. Applicants for the posi-
tion of sales representative are interviewed by these
managers but the retail advertising manager con-
ducts a subsequent interview if the manager wants
an applicant to be hired. With respect to griev-
ances, the evidence indicates that the zone sales
managers and chain and department store manager
are the first individuals consulted by employees,
and grievances may be resolved at this level. How-
ever, discipline is handled in conjunction with the
manager's superiors, i.e., problems are brought to
the attention of the retail manager and his assistant,
and discipline is formulated by all managers. The
four managers in question are responsible for au-
thorizing overtime, scheduling vacations, preparing
work schedules, and checking timecards. It also ap-
pears that they evaluate probationary employees
and salesmen on a continuing basis; this is particu-
larly true with respect to the Virginia and Mary-
land offices where, unlike the District and chain
and department store sections, the respective of-
fices are located outside the Company's main build-
ing. Further, these managers prepare and make rec-
ommendations with respect to budgets, and pro-
jected travel and other expenses. Each of the cur-
rent managers has attended training courses to
learn management skills, transactional analysis, ac-
counting procedures, and interview techniques.
They also attend weekly management meetings in
the advertising department, and monthly staff
meetings held by the vice president for advertising.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude in agree-
ment with the Employer that the positions of the
zone sales managers and the chain and department
store manager are supervisory in nature and should
be excluded from the unit. While it is clear, as
urged by the Union, that these individuals spend
part of their working time engaged in work related
to the sale, placement, and cost of advertisements
for their particular zones or departments, it is none-
theless clear that these individuals perform a
number of supervisory functions. It is significant
that these managers perform evaluations and are in-
volved in the running, as first-line supervisors, of
the various sales departments. The positions are
therefore to be excluded from the unit.
The commissioned sales manager position was
created in 1976. It appears that Mark Meagher, the
Employer's president, was involved in conceiving
the idea of a commissioned sales manager position
when the newspaper was preparing to publish
weekly zone sections. At that time, Robert Moe
was named as commissioned sales manager, a posi-
tion he held at the time of the hearing, and was as-
signed to study the need for such a position and
the concomitant need for commissioned salesmen
to sell advertisements for the newspaper. Moe rec-
ommended the establishment of various territories
from which commissioned sales agents would oper-
ate, and the hire of persons on a contract basis for
a specified time to sell various kinds of advertising
based on terms set out in the contract. Moe's
report and his recommendations were discussed
and revised by the vice president for advertising,
McCormick, and the retail advertising manager,
Arcaro, and ultimately implemented by the Com-
pany.
Prior to interviewing prospective sales agents,
Moe discussed the standards to be used for such
position with McCormick and Arcaro. Moe inter-
viewed approximately 40 applicants for the position
of commissioned sales agent. Although Arcaro par-
ticipated in some of the early interviews, the final
selection of the initial eight commissioned sales
agents was made by Moe. It further appears that
Moe was involved in promulgating the prototype
contract which the commissioned sales agents sign
upon accepting their position.
In addition to the responsibilities involved in
hiring the agents, Moe assisted in devising a train-
ing program with the sales development and train-
ing manager to train the agents. Moe meets ap-
proximately once a week with the sales agents to
assist them in their work, and also monitors their
work during the remainder of the week. He assists
the sales agents in locating accounts and in resolv-
ing conflicts or problem accounts. Further, he can
approve credit. Moe can also transfer accounts if
there are problems with a particular agent, but the
contracts do prohibit reassignment of accounts
without consent of the agent. Moe, however, can
terminate a contract if an agent violates it.
The Post claims, and the Union does not argue
to the contrary, that the commissioned sales agents
are independent contractors and not employees of
the Company. Thus, there is no argument that the
commissioned sales manager is a supervisory em-
ployee. However, we agree with the Employer
that the commissioned sales manager position
should be excluded as a managerial position. The
commissioned sales manager is the only person, ac-
cording to this record, with whom the commis-
sioned sales agents contract and deal. Although the
record establishes that there are guidelines for the
percentage of commission to be paid, the goals for
advertising the agents receive, and the assignment
of geographical sales territory, it is clear that the
172
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
commissioned sales manager was almost solely re-
sponsible for interviewing and hiring the initial
complement of commissioned sales agents. Further,
Moe works with the agents in approving credits,
resolving problem accounts, training, and he has
the authority to terminate the contract if an agent
violates it. Under these circumstances, we conclude
the commissioned sales manager is a representative
of management in his relationship with the commis-
sioned sales agents and therefore a managerial em-
ployee who should be excluded from the unit.
2. Classified Advertising: The classified advertis-
ing department is responsible for the sale and pro-
duction of classified advertising for the newspaper.
This department is headed by a classified advertis-
ing manager and an assistant advertising manager,
who are excluded from the unit. There are three
sections which form the classified advertising de-
partment: the phone room, classified sales, and real
estate sales.28
(a) Phone room: The phone room manager heads
this section. The Employer contends that the train-
ing manager, the phone room supervisors (the row
supervisors), and the copy desk supervisor should
also be excluded as supervisors or managerial em-
ployees.
The phone room consists of five rows of 20
desks. Situated at the head of each row are the row
supervisors. In addition to the five full-time row
supervisors, there are two part-time supervisors
who work on weekends. There are 135 telephone
solicitors working in the phone room, with ap-
proximately 11 to 12 working on any specific row
during the day. Four rows handle specific types of
classified advertising including, inter alia, help
wanted, real estate, auto, boats, apartment rentals,
merchandise, and business real estate. There is also
a voluntary row which handles miscellaneous calls
and obituaries. As a rule, new employees start on
the voluntary row and progress to more specific
rows. The telephone solicitors usually take copy
for their particular row's subject classification.
However, each telephone solicitor is responsible
for taking any telephone call which may come in
to the phone room. Moreover, several classified ad-
vertisers have "contract accounts" by which the
advertiser has a specified telephone solicitor to
handle that particular classified advertising ac-
count. In performing their functions, the telephone
solicitors answer the telephone and type out the
appropriate copy for the classified advertisement,
which is then forwarded on a conveyor belt system
28 The real estate sales manager is excluded from the unit by agree-
ment of the parties. No positions in the real estate sales section are at
issue here.
to the copy desk where the telephone solicitor's
copy is processed as explained below.
Under the phone room manager, who is ex-
cluded by agreement from the unit, is the phone
room training manager. It is undisputed that the
phone room training manager interviews applicants
for the telephone solicitor position, and makes the
decision with respect to hiring. It also appears that
telephone solicitor requests for vacation and sick
leave, as well as leave without pay, are forwarded
by the row supervisors to the phone room training
manager for approval. Further, the phone room
training manager is responsible for evaluating pro-
bationary employees as well as full-time employees.
These evaluations are based, in part, on evaluation
forms filled out by the row supervisors as discussed
below. In addition to these duties, the training
manager has the primary function of training all
new telephone solicitors. The phone room training
manager decides whether and when a particular
telephone solicitor is ready to be placed on a row.
When that determination is made, the phone room
manager places the telephone solicitor on the vol-
untary row. The training manager may monitor the
work of the new employee, and, if further training
is deemed desirable, may recall a probationary em-
ployee from the row for further training.
Based on the foregoing, and especially the fact
that the phone room training manager interviews
and hires telephone solicitors, we conclude that the
phone room training manager is a supervisor
within the meaning of the Act and therefore should
be excluded from the unit.
As noted, the phone room supervisors, also re-
ferred to as row supervisors, sit at the head of a
particular row facing the telephone solicitors who
work at the desks in that row. Each row supervi-
sor has a monitoring capability which permits the
row supervisor to listen in on any telephone solici-
tor's transaction with a potential classified advertis-
ing customer. The row supervisors may decide
among themselves on the necessity for moving par-
ticular individuals within rows, although perma-
nent relocations between rows require the approval
of the phone room manager. Also, the row supervi-
sors fill out evaluation forms for telephone solici-
tors on their rows and forward such forms to the
phone room training manager, who makes the ulti-
mate evaluation of the employee. The row supervi-
sors may issue informal oral reprimands, e.g., they
may tell a certain telephone solicitor that his or her
work is not satisfactory on a particular call, but
other more formal reprimands are made by the
phone room manager and the classified advertising
manager. In addition to the monitoring responsibil-
ity, the row supervisors also spend approximately
-
173
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
10 to 15 percent of their time on the telephones
handling matters such as complaints. During par-
ticularly heavy traffic times, or during absences of
telephone solicitors, the row supervisors may aso
perform telephone soliciting work.
Contrary to the Employer, we conclude that the
row supervisors are not supervisors within the
meaning of the Act. Thus, it would appear that
their alleged supervisory functions are limited to, at
best, informal reprimands and temporary reloca-
tions of personnel. It is undisputed that the row su-
pervisors are not involved in hire, discharge, or
more formal disciplinary actions. Further, their au-
thority to relocate solicitors is limited and any per-
sonnel relocation requires the phone room manag-
er's approval. Although the Employer asserts that
if the row supervisors are not found to be supervi-
sors the supervisor/employee ratio would be too
low, we note the ratio is not so small as it seems
because only 68 of the 135 telephone solicitors
work full time, and only 11 or 12 work at any time
on a particular row. In sum, it appears that the row
supervisors are more akin to leadmen, who are re-
sponsible for insuring the quality and correctness of
a product, than they are to statutory supervisors.
The Employer also seeks to exclude the copy
desk supervisor, who reports to the phone room
manager. Copy room employees are responsible for
processing the telephone solicitor's copy. The copy
desk supervisor and three full-time and three part-
time clerks are responsible for performing this
function. In the copy room area, three main desks
are positioned around a conveyor belt which brings
copy from the phone room. One clerk is responsi-
ble for separating the typed ads from the phone
room and assembling the copies by date. At the
other two desks, clerks prepare ads for daily and
future copy and indicate which ads are to be killed,
corrected, or otherwise changed for daily as well
as future copy. The kills and corrections are sent to
the video display terminal (VDT) department
while the new ads are sent to the composing room
for publication. All the full-time and part-time
clerks perform the duties described above with
their responsibilities being rotated on a regular
basis. The copy desk is also responsible for tabulat-
ing and estimating daily advertising lineage; this in-
formation is sent to the makeup department. Two
additional clerks, who are also a part of the copy
room, work at a front counter located near the en-
trance to the Company's building and handle walk-
in business. These clerks also receive ads as well as
payments, cancellations, and other transactions in-
volving the classified advertising department. The
copy desk supervisor makes rounds to the front
desk, where he can grant adjustments for advertis-
ing errors at the front desk and handle customer in-
quiries at that location.
The copy desk supervisor's relationship with the
clerks in the copy room and at the front desk ap-
pears somewhat similar to that of the row supervi-
sors to the telephone solicitors in the phone room.
Thus, the record shows that the copy desk supervi-
sor may make recommendations on promotions or
transfers. However, the phone room manager's per-
mission is required before phone room employees
may transfer to the copy desk. Although the copy
desk supervisor has issued a written reprimand on
one occasion, it appears that, prior to the issuance
of the reprimand, the copy desk supervisor consult-
ed both the phone room manager and the assistant
classified manager, both superiors, regarding the in-
cident. In fact, the written reprimand was signed
not by the copy desk supervisor but by the phone
room manager. Copy desk employees do consult
the copy desk supervisor regarding vacation and
time off; however, the record shows that there
have been no conflicts on vacations or time off
dates, and thus the copy desk supervisor has not
been required to resolve conflicts concerning such
matters. Nor is there any indication that the copy
desk supervisor does not follow the regular Post
guidelines of permitting time off as necessary so
long as the department can function. We find,
therefore, that the record in this case does not es-
tablish that the copy desk supervisor is a supervisor
within the meaning of the Act and thus we decline
to exclude him from the unit.
(b) Classified sales: Classified sales is responsible
for special promotions and projects as well as out-
side selling efforts. These latter endeavors concern
such classified ads as automobile merchandise,
boats, and real estate, among others. In addition to
the classified sales manager, whom the Employer
seeks to exclude, the section employs approximate-
ly 10 outside sales people, a clerk, several tele-
phone salespersons, and three inside/outside sales-
persons. The inside/outside salespersons spend part
of their time in the phone room (inside) and the re-
mainder of their time on classified sales (outside).
Each of the outside salespeople is responsible for
particular territories. These assignments may be
changed by the classified sales manager when he
deems it necessary. The classified sales manager is
also involved in resolving disputes related to terri-
torial problems. During their sales trips, the outside
sales personnel are sometimes accompanied by the
classified sales manager, who makes such trips ap-
proximately five times a week. The classified sales
manager also assists the outside sales personnel in
adjustments for errors in classified advertisement.
The classified sales manager has interviewed and
174
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
recommended the transfer of personnel to sales po-
sitions. However, it appears that the classified ad-
vertising manager has ultimate responsibility for
hiring outside salespersons. The classified sales
manager is responsible for evaluating all probation-
ary employees. The classified sales manager must
obtain the approval of the classified advertising
manager to discipline or reprimand an employee.
The record shows, and the Union does not dis-
pute, that the classified sales manager assigns and
directs the approximately 16 employees in the clas-
sified sales section. Unlike the row supervisors and
the copy desk supervisor, it appears that the classi-
fied sales manager exercises independent judgment
and utilizes management discretion in dealing with
the outside and inside/outside salesmen and we
conclude that this position should be excluded as a
supervisory position under the Act.
3. General Advertising: The general advertising
department is responsible for production and sale
of general or national advertising, which involves a
particular brand or manufacturer rather than a spe-
cific retailer. The general advertising department is
headed by a manager and assistant manager and is
divided into a sales staff and a production unit. The
position of principal clerk in the production unit is
at issue here. The Employer claims this position is
a supervisory one.
The production unit of the general advertising
department processes the national advertising
orders. In addition to the principal clerk, there are
three senior clerks who work on the production
end of the national advertising unit. The clerks are
responsible for writing up orders, logging them,
and forwarding the orders to production for print-
ing. The three senior clerks have particular juris-
dictions; one clerk is responsible for daily copy, an-
other for Sunday and magazine copy, and the third
for in-house copy. June Hardy, the current princi-
pal clerk, checks all of the clerks' copy.
Both the principal clerk and the three senior
clerks at the time of the hearing had been in the
department for many years. Hardy prepares sched-
ules and assigns work to the three clerks, although
as noted each clerk is responsible for a specific
type of copy and assignments are made according-
ly. Indeed, there has been little need to change the
manner of scheduling, or even processing the copy,
because of the longevity and competency of the
clerks in the section. Further, the clerks tell Hardy
when they intend to take vacations or time off, and
if there are any conflicts in dates wanted by em-
ployees, Hardy will resolve the problem. However,
the record indicates that rarely has there been
reason to resolve any conflicts.
Hardy assists in processing copy on an as-needed
basis. She also organizes files of advertisers, insures
that proofs are forwarded from the production unit
to the printers, maintains records, and keeps track
of the lineage of national advertising.
With respect to the hiring of clerks, the principal
clerk has interviewed and recommended hiring cer-
tain applicants, but the final decision on hiring is
made by the manager for general advertising. Thus,
the other three clerks currently working in the pro-
duction unit, who were hired between 1953 and
1965, were interviewed by Hardy and management
officials. 2 9 The record also indicates that the prin-
cipal clerk was once involved in a decision to dis-
charge certain stenographers. However, as with the
decision to hire the three clerks in the department,
this instance of discharge occurred many years (in
this instance, more than 7 years) prior to the hear-
ing in this case, and at a time when the national ad-
vertising department was organized on a different
basis and the principal clerk assumed more respon-
sibility than she currently exercises. Thus, at one
time, the principal clerk also shared in responsibil-
ity over the sales staff but has since worked only in
the production unit.
Considering the above, and based on the record
as a whole, we do not find the principal clerk to be
a supervisory employee as urged by the Employer.
We note that the principal clerk appears to be a
more experienced employee who uses expertise in
the area to coordinate the production of the nation-
al advertising. The incidents of alleged supervisory
authority which the Employer asserts mandate the
removal of the principal clerk from the unit oc-
curred for the most part prior to a departmental re-
organization which curtailed the authority of the
principal clerk.30 We also note that the general ad-
vertising department appears to be a relatively
small department with only 13 sales staff personnel
and the 3 senior clerks, and I principal clerk in the
production unit. There are both a general advertis-
ing manager and an assistant advertising manager
who head this department. And, while the general
advertising manager testified that he spends no
more than 5 to 10 minutes a day in the production
29 At the time of the hearing, the general advertising department was
waiting for budgetary approval for a fifth clerk position for production
work. There was record testimony that Hardy would participate in the
selection of the new hire, if the position were available, but it appears
that the same process as described above would be used; i.e., Hardy and
the general advertising manager would review the applicant. The general
advertising manager would have the final decision on hiring.
30 The record shows one recent instance of a recommendation by the
principal clerk of a merit increase for a senior clerk. However, the record
also establishes that the general manager not only reviewed this recom-
mendation, but added his own reasoning into the recommendation for the
merit increase; the general manager noted that he was also in a position
to evaluate that employee's work. A decision on this recommendation
had not been made at the time of the hearing.
175
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
unit of which the principal clerk is a part, he ex-
plained that he spent so little time there because
the department operated on a set identifiable
system.
4. Advertising Administration: Within this sub-
heading, the Employer seeks to exclude a number
of categories whose job duties are detailed below.
The position of advertising agency representa-
tive, which the Employer claims is both supervi-
sory and managerial, was created in September
1974 and comes under the advertising manager's
jurisdiction. 31 The advertising agency representa-
tive, James Leonard, is the liaison for the Company
with advertising agencies which place ads in the
newspaper for retail clients. Leonard speaks to
these advertising agencies about rates and rate
changes, the production of advertisements in the
newspaper, and the creation of special advertising
sections for their clients. Approximately 60 percent
of the advertising agency representative's working
time consists of visiting agencies in an area includ-
ing: the District of Columbia; Richmond, Virginia;
Baltimore, Maryland; and Philadelphia, Pennsylva-
nia. The balance of his time is spent in the office
where he is occupied with telephone conversations
with these same agencies. He also prepares propos-
als for the department. For example, he has pro-
posed a letter reminding agencies about the Com-
pany's rules on advertising length. The vice presi-
dent for advertising testified that such policy rec-
ommendations would receive the normal weight
given to such proposals; i.e., the vice president and
other superiors would make the final decision on
whether to implement the proposal. The advertis-
ing agency representative makes use of approxi-
mately a $4,000 annual budget for expenditures for
travel, stationery supplies, trade publications, and
other items necessary for performing his job. He
assists in drawing up the plans for this budget in
the first instance. Finally, the advertising agency
representative shares the use of a secretary with
the sales development and training manager. The
advertising agency representative may give work
to the secretary or ask her to perform overtime
work, and, on at least one occasion, he has recom-
mended to the advertising manager that a repri-
mand be issued because of his dissatisfaction with a
secretary's work. This reprimand followed com-
plaints that had been voiced by both the advertis-
ing agency representative and the sales develop-
ment and training manager.
Contrary to the Employer, we do not believe
that these facts indicate that the advertising agency
representative is either a supervisory or managerial
3'At one time, the advertising agency representative reported directly
to the vice president of advertising.
employee. We first reject the Employer's assertion
that the advertising agency representative's rela-
tionship with the secretary proves him to be a su-
pervisor. The record reflects that the advertising
agency representative's authority over this secre-
tary is shared with another employee and at most is
limited to discussions with that other employee and
the advertising manager concerning the secretary's
performance. Such shared and limited responsibil-
ity over a clerical employee does not establish su-
pervisory authority within the meaning of the
Act.3 2 Nor are we persuaded that the visits of the
advertising agency representative to the agencies at
their locations or the daily telephone contact he
maintains with these agencies establishes the adver-
tising agency representative as a managerial em-
ployee. While these conversations do concern
rates, production, and special advertising sections,
the record does not show that the advertising
agency representative helped determine rates of ad-
vertising, or that he was aware of other such confi-
dential matters. These factors were compelling rea-
sons for finding the inside salesmen to be manageri-
al employees in CF&I Steel Corporation,3 3 a case
relied on by the Employer here. In sum, it appears
that the advertising agency representative is in-
volved in various business contacts on behalf of the
Company, but he is not involved in the setting of
management policy and is not a managerial em-
ployee.
The sales development and training manager po-
sition, which the Employer claims is supervisory
and managerial, was created in August 1974. As
the title suggests, this manager is responsible for
developing new sales programs as well as training
the Company's sales representatives. The sales de-
velopment and training manager spends approxi-
mately one-third of his working time on the train-
ing aspect of his job. The training program is two-
pronged. First, it involves the training of new out-
side sales personnel. The sales development and
training manager, along with approximately three
other managers, interviews potential trainees and
makes recommendations concerning hiring. This
manager then trains the new personnel, subsequent-
ly evaluates the people in the training course pro-
gram, and makes recommendations concerning the
assignment of the trainee to an area in the advertis-
ing department. It appears that the sales develop-
ment and training manager has never negatively
evaluated a trainee, and that all assignments are ul-
timately made by the vice president for advertising.
In addition to training new sales personnel, the
32 See, e.g., Suburban Newspaper Publications, Inc., 226 NLRB at 157.
33 196 NLRB 470 (1972).
176
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
sales development and training manager also main-
tains training programs for current sales personnel.
He spends time researching and putting together
such programs, including bringing in outside ex-
perts to assist in the presentation of the program.
The sales development and training manager runs
the training programs without the assistance of any
other employees.
The remaining two-thirds of this manager's
working time consists of developing sales programs
for the advertising department. In contemplation of
this task, the sales development and training man-
ager determines deficiencies in the Employer's sales
program. He analyzes sales problems, monitors
competing media, and talks with line sales manag-
ers, who have primary responsibility for sales, con-
cerning these problems. The sales development
programs developed by this manager involve tac-
tics, strategies, and promotions to be used by the
sales personnel for selling advertising for the Com-
pany. The sales development and training manager
develops incentives and other bonus programs for
which sales personnel are eligible. These incentive
programs existed before the creation of the sales
development and training manager position; how-
ever, the current manager has been given complete
charge of further developing these programs.
The foregoing establishes that the sales develop-
ment and training manager is a managerial employ-
ee and should be excluded from the unit. The man-
ager's planning and effectuation of incentive award
programs and the development of tactics, strate-
gies, and promotions involved with these incentive
awards creates an actual or potential conflict of in-
terest which the Board has held to be a factor to
consider in determining whether an employee is a
managerial employee.3 4 While these programs may
have existed prior to the creation of the sales de-
velopment and training manager position, it is
nonetheless conceded by the Union that the sales
development and training manager spends "much
of his time" with the sales contest designed to pro-
vide incentive for sales personnel. Therefore, we
find that this employee should be excluded from
the unit.
The special promotions manager, whom the Em-
ployer contends is a managerial employee, original-
ly worked under the retail advertising category and
generated retail sales for special promotions in that
department. However, in October 1976, the respon-
sibilities of the special promotions manager were
expanded to include classified and general advertis-
ing as well as retail advertising. The special promo-
tions manager works with managers in these other
s4 See, e.g., General Dynamics Corporation, Convair Aerospace Division.
San Diego Operations, 213 NLRB 851, 863 (1974).
areas to develop ideas for special promotions to sell
advertising. The special promotions manager, in
contemplation of placing ads in these special pro-
motions sections, makes sales presentations to pro-
spective advertisers, and also reports problems to
the Company and to the advertisers regarding spe-
cial promotion ideas. Once a promotion has been
worked out, the special promotions manager pro-
vides leads for salesmen so that the advertising may
be sold. An example of work which the special
promotions manager performs is the "swing zone"
shopping center promotion in which the special
promotions manager proposed the idea of partial,
instead of full, newspaper distribution of shopping
center ads. In this way shopping centers which
were located in Virginia, for example, would not
have their advertisements published in Maryland
where they might be less effective. The special
promotions manager's proposals are presented to
his superiors in the advertising departments, who
are already excluded from the unit. For example,
the "swing zone" shopping center promotion was
first proposed to the retail advertising manager. It
was then sent to the advertising director and to the
vice president of sales, who considered it and ap-
proved the continued development of the promo-
tion. In developing ads, the special promotions
manager also shares two clerks with the supple-
ments manager, although it appears that the latter,
and not the special promotions manager, has au-
thority over those clerks.
In agreement with the Union, we find that the
special promotions manager is not a managerial em-
ployee. The mere fact that the special promotions
manager primarily develops ideas does not "inher-
ently" invest that position with managerial author-
ity. While the special promotions manager is
indeed concerned with selling advertising for the
Company, this goal is well within the scope and
objectives of the Employer's business objectives. In
this regard, it would appear that, like a salesman,
the special promotions manager is responsible for
generating advertising by supplements or other
promotions to be placed in the newspaper. More-
over, the special promotions manager's alleged
"policy implementations" are subject to complete
review by managerial employees. We thus find that
the special promotions manager does not meet the
Board's definition of a managerial employee and
should not be excluded from the unit.
The co-op advertising manager, whom the Com-
pany contends is a supervisory and managerial em-
ployee, is responsible for locating and bringing to
the attention of sales persons "co-op money." (Co-
op money is defined in the record as funds allocat-
ed by a manufacturer or distributor for advertising
177
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
cooperatively with local retailers. For example, a
national manufacturer of men's clothing, makes
money available to be used in conjunction with a
local clothing store for joint advertising.) The co-
op advertising manager position was created in
1974. One-half of the working time of the co-op
manager consists of locating such co-op money.
The co-op manager talks to manufacturing repre-
sentatives, reads trade publications, and consults
copies of co-op contracts which are on file with
the Newspaper Co-op Network, of which the co-
op manager is a member. Upon locating the co-op
money, the co-op manager informs the sales per-
sonnel or the sales manager so that they may at-
tempt to secure the account for the Employer. The
co-op manager also may design advertising pack-
ages to make the prospect of co-op advertising in
the Post more attractive for the co-op advertisers.
While not actually involved in setting advertising
rates, the co-op manager makes adjustments of
such advertising rates when necessary. The co-op
manager also makes studies as needed on matters
such as commissions to be paid to agencies that
assist in locating co-op money for advertising. The
co-op manager also makes reports on need for in-
creased co-op staffing. The reports and studies are
sent first to the advertising department manager
and then, on occasion, to higher Post executives.
The co-op manager uses a clerk-steno in perform-
ing these tasks. The co-op manager and the sales
training and development manager share this clerk-
steno. The clerk-steno performs work such as
checking out reports and contracts. Although he
shares the clerk, Leonard has been told that he can
hire and discharge the clerk-steno, but has never
done so.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the co-
op manager is neither a managerial nor supervisory
employee. The co-op manager does not set man-
agement or advertising policy. Nor is this manag-
er's relationship with the clerk-steno sufficient to
demonstrate supervisory status.3 5 We thus decline
to exclude this position from the unit.
The art department operates within the advertis-
ing administration and is responsible for producing
ads for the salesmen and their clients which are to
appear in the newspaper. This department is
headed by the advertising art director, already ex-
cluded from the unit, who reports to the advertis-
ing manager. Also within the advertising art de-
partment are two assistant advertising art directors,
whom the Employer seeks to exclude as supervi-
sors, approximately 15-19 artists, 4 clerks, I co-
pywriter, and I photocamera person.
3" See discussion supra, concerning the advertising agency representa-
live.
When a salesperson wants an advertisement cre-
ated, the salesperson sends a work order to the ad-
vertising art department. Although sometimes these
work orders go directly to a particular artist, they
are placed for the most part at the desks of the two
assistant advertising art directors, who subsequent-
ly distribute the work orders. Both assistant adver-
tising art directors assign work. They distribute the
work orders primarily on the basis of the individual
artists' workload, and the skills required for the
particular type of ad that is needed. It appears that
the assistant advertising art directors spend less
than half their working time making such assign-
ments and reviewing the subsequent work product.
An overtime chart is maintained by one of the as-
sistant advertising art directors to insure even dis-
tribution of overtime work; however, overtime is
mandated only after consultation between the assis-
tant advertising art directors and the advertising art
director. The record does not reveal that the assis-
tant advertising art directors schedule the artists
and other employees in the art department. The as-
sistant advertising art directors do not grant vaca-
tion or time off, these functions being performed
by the advertising art director.
Applicants for artist positions in the advertising
art department initially are interviewed and their
applications reviewed by the advertising art direc-
tor. During this first screening, the advertising art
director examines the portfolio which the applicant
brings to the interview and makes a decision about
the applicant's qualifications. If the advertising art
director decides that the applicant is worth further
consideration, the portfolio may be sent to the as-
sistant advertising art directors, who review the
work in the portfolio and make an oral assessment
of the work. The record shows that each assistant
art director reviews and assesses applicants on no
more than four to six occasions a year, and that the
advertising art director, in addition to the first
screening, makes the final determination on hiring a
particular artist. On occasion, the advertising art
director sends a prospect to be interviewed and
shown the art department by the assistant advertis-
ing art directors. It also appears that on occasion
staff artists have also reviewed portfolios.
The assistant advertising art directors play no
part in the discharge of employees from the art de-
partment. With respect to transfers, it appears that
the Employer maintains approximately three artists
in the Virginia sales office and three in the Mary-
land sales office, and that the opinion of the assis-
tant advertising art directors concerning which art-
ists should be sent to those locations is solicited by
the advertising art director. However, the assistant
advertising art directors have no contact with or
178
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
control over those suburban artists. It also appears
that on occasion the need to reprimand an artist is
discussed by the advertising art director with the
assistant advertising art directors, but it is the ad-
vertising art director who issues such reprimands.
The assistant advertising art directors, upon re-
viewing work, may instruct an artist to change or
remake a particular piece of work, but they do not
otherwise reprimand artists. Finally, it appears that
at least one-half of the assistant advertising art di-
rectors' worktime is spent doing layouts and other
art work that is also done by the artists in the de-
partment.
These facts do not establish that the assistant ad-
vertising art directors are supervisors. The Em-
ployer's reliance on the assistant advertising art di-
rectors' review of portfolios and interviews of pro-
spective hires to support their supervisory status is
misplaced. Thus, it is clear that the advertising art
director makes both the preliminary and final selec-
tion of artists and he merely solicits the opinion of
the assistant advertising art directors, whose assess-
ments are not always followed. Hence, it appears
that, at best, the advertising art director relies on
the technical review by the assistant advertising art
directors of an applicant's work and not on their
general opinion or appraisal of the applicant.3 6 In
any event, however, it is clear that the advertising
art director reviews the applicant and portfolio in
all instances. Further, it appears that the "assign-
ment" of art work is routine. It is undisputed that
the primary factor in determining assignments is
workload and that, although the assistant advertis-
ing art directors may make assignments based on
an artists's skills, such assignments appear to be no
more than what would be expected when a more
experienced person decides there is a more efficient
way for a particular process to be completed.37 It
is worth noting that the assistant advertising art di-
rectors themselves are involved at least one-half of
their worktime in producing ads similar to those
produced by the other artists in the department.
We thus conclude that the record does not estab-
lish that the assistant advertising art directors are
supervisors within the meaning of the Act.
Advertising services was formed in January 1977
by the merger of the publications department and
the advertising control center. It produces the dis-
play advertising for the general, retail real estate,
and classified advertising departments. The depart-
ment is headed by a manager, Allan Kohan. The
Employer asserts that the assistant manager, Albert
Dixon, is a supervisor who should be excluded
36 See Great Western Broadcasting Corp. d/b/a KXTV. 192 NLRB
1203. 1205 (1971).
3 Cf. National Broadcasting Company. Inc. 160 NLRB 1440 (1966).
from the unit. There are 47 other employees, full-
time and part-time clerks and messengers, working
in advertising services, which operates on a three-
shift, 24-hour basis. Each shift is headed by a su-
pervisor, whose placement is not in dispute here.
Dixon was appointed assistant manager in Janu-
ary 1977.38 From that time until mid-April 1977,
he also served as acting manager of the depart-
ment.3 9 When Kohan assumed the position of man-
ager, an announcement was posted stating that
Dixon, as assistant manager, would be responsible
for the workflow and the processing of the adver-
tising materials. The memo also stated that Dixon
would oversee the activities on all three shifts and
would be responsible for "all issues of personnel
administration." Dixon testified that it was under-
stood between him and Kohan that Dixon would
handle most of the personnel administration aspects
of the department while Kohan would be responsi-
ble for implementing the new system introduced by
the combination of the old department into the ad-
vertising services department. It was Dixon's testi-
mony that he would be responsible for approxi-
mately 95 percent of the department's personnel
matters. 4 0
Both during his period as acting manager and as
assistant manager, Dixon has been involved in di-
recting the department and making personnel deci-
sions. As assistant manager, Dixon works on the 3-
11 p.m. shift, and generally manages his staff of 20-
30 employees. As noted above, he also has general
responsibility for all shifts. The assistant manager
reviews and checks the work of clerks, tracks lost
ads, authorizes overtime, schedules work assign-
ments, and approves overtime. Dixon also holds
weekly meetings with employees to discuss prob-
lems in the department. Further, Dixon, with
Kohan's approval, has moved people from one shift
to another to facilitate the copy flow for which
Dixon is primarily responsible. Also, Dixon issued
several reprimands between January and June 1977,
both as acting manager and as assistant manager.
These reprimands were signed by Dixon and two
of them were not reviewed by superiors prior to is-
suance. Dixon was also involved in the discharge
of two employees. In one instance, Dixon fired an
employee for abuse of sick leave and improper han-
3a Dixon formerly was advertising control manager.
39 During that time, Dixon reported to Twombly, then an administra-
tive assistant to the vice president of advertising.
40 An earlier memo from Twombly to the advertising director stated
that Dixon's tasks would include work records administration, job perfor-
mance measurement, and the solving of daily problems. The memo also
stated that, together with Kohan, Dixon would make recommendations
on salary. and participate in discipline, schedule, and shift assignment
matters. That memo stated that Kohan would he in charge of hiring and
firing and the overall running and development of the new department.
179
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
dling of copy. Dixon subsequently discussed the
issue with both Kohan and Twombly, who told
Dixon he could make the decision. Dixon went to
personnel, picked up severance pay for the employ-
ee, and gave him his termination notice.
We agree with the Employer that Dixon is a su-
pervisor within the meaning of the Act and should
be excluded from the unit. The record reveals that
in his capacity as assistant manager, he responsibly
directs the work in the advertising services depart-
ment. Also, unlike evidence relating to other al-
leged supervisors in the advertising department, the
record here affirmatively reflects the effective rec-
ommendation and actual effectuation of discharge
and discipline by the assistant manager. Based on
these factors, we conclude that the Employer has
demonstrated that Dixon is a supervisor who must
be excluded from the unit.
4. Customer Relations: The customer relations de-
partment once operated within the communications
division but now is part of the advertising depart-
ment. Included within this department are the cus-
tomer relations manager and the customer relations
supervisor, both of whom the Employer seeks to
exclude as supervisory and managerial employees.
There are also six senior clerks and one secretary
in the department.
The customer relations department handles com-
plaints from customers regarding advertisements
which appear in the newspaper. These complaints
may arise due to errors in printing or omissions
from printing, or they may be more general or aes-
thetic complaints regarding the advertisements.
The customer relations department also handles
general complaints about the newspaper and for-
wards such complaints to the appropriate depart-
ment. The customer relations department solves
some customer complaints by allowing adjust-
ments, credits, or reruns as dictated by the particu-
lar situation and the error. Allowance guidelines
for mistakes in printing of advertisements have
been promulgated and are followed by the six
senior clerks, as well as by the customer relations
supervisor, and the customer relations manager.
The senior clerks are responsible for handling ad-
justments whose value is less than $100, and may
grant adjustments without clearance up to $25. Ad-
justments between $25 and $100 are cleared with
the customer relations supervisor. The customer re-
lations supervisor handles adjustments between
$100 and $2,000, although the customer relations
manager may handle some of these complaints. The
customer relations manager is responsible for ad-
justments with a value greater than $2,000 up to
$5,000. The customer relations supervisor, in addi-
tion to handling the adjustments between $100 and
$2,000, also reviews the adjustments done by the
clerks in the department. The department handles
approximately 3,000 such adjustments a month and
the record indicates that the customer relations su-
pervisor spends no more than I hour a day review-
ing the clerks' work. The amount of allowances
handled by the department in 1976 totaled
$1,300,000.
As indicated above, the customer relations man-
ager involves himself with large scale problems re-
garding adjustments. In addition to this work, it ap-
pears that the customer relations manager inter-
views and makes recommendations regarding the
hiring of clerks. The customer relations manager
also has been involved in disciplinary matters. In
one instance, he overruled the recommendation for
reprimand made by the customer relations supervi-
sor. It further appears from the record that the cus-
tomer relations manager was involved in the pro-
motion of the customer relations supervisor to that
employee's present position.
The customer relations supervisor, 4 1 in addition
to handling adjustments falling between $100 and
$2,000, makes various assignments to the senior
clerks. However, the senior clerks usually work on
display and classified adjustments in a specific al-
phabetic area; i.e., the adjustments are divided
among the clerks alphabetically so that the custom-
er relations supervisor's discretion in making as-
signments is limited. The customer relations super-
visor also coordinates vacations and breaks for the
clerks, although this latter responsibility was dis-
cussed with the customer relations manager prior
to the supervisor's taking it on. As noted above,
the customer relations supervisor has been involved
in recommending reprimands; however, testimony
on one such instance revealed that the reprimand
was subsequently evaluated and signed by the cus-
tomer relations manager. Finally, the record re-
veals that the customer relations sueprvisor collat-
ed material into a pamphlet setting forth the
allowance guidelines to be followed within the de-
partment. It is these guidelines which are followed
by all employees within the customer relations de-
partment when allowing adjustments, credits, or
reruns on particular items.
In agreement with the Employer, we find the
customer relations manager to be a statutory super-
4L The Union asserts that the customer relations supervisor actually
performs the duties of a principal clerk and thus is not a supervisor or
managerial employee. It asserts that the customer relations supervisor at
the time of the hearing had been promoted from the position of senior
clerk to administrative clerk and then to the present position. However,
as noted earlier at fn. 22, it is the job function and not the title of the
particular position under consideration which controls the determination
of supervisory/managerial status, and, thus, we place no undue reliance
on the title here or elsewhere on this proceeding.
180
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
visor under the Act; however, we do not agree
with the Employer that the customer relations su-
pervisor is a supervisory or managerial employee.
It appears that the customer relations manager is
primarily involved in hiring decisions in the depart-
ment, as well as with discipline, merit increases,
and promotions. The customer relations manager's
authority in such areas is of such a nature as to re-
quire the exclusion of the customer relations man-
ager as a supervisor. However, we cannot agree
with the Employer that the same conclusion is true
with respect to the customer relations supervisor.
While the Employer argues that the customer rela-
tions manager is concerned with "large scale"
problems only, and that other supervisory functions
are left to the customer relations supervisor, the
record establishes, and the Employer concedes,
that the customer relations manager is involved in
the daily functioning of the department. Further, it
appears that the customer relations supervisor has
responsibility in highly routine matters only; in this
regard, we note that both the customer relations
supervisor and the customer relations manager are
employees with extensive backgrounds in the cus-
tomer relations aspect of the Employer's oper-
ations. Further, the fact that the customer relations
supervisor can authorize adjustments up to $2,000
does not of itself dictate a conclusion that this posi-
tion is managerial. It is clear that such decisions are
made within prescribed guidelines promulgated by
the Employer, which are to be followed in all in-
stances. It is significant that the customer relations
manager maintains supervision and responsibility
for all adjustments in an amount greater than
$2,000 and that even clerks can "pledge the Em-
ployer's credit" up to $25 without prior approval.
B. Circulation Department
The circulation department is responsible for the
sale, distribution, and delivery of the newspaper
through newsstand and street sales, home delivery,
and out-of-town mail delivery. The department is
headed by the vice president of circulation, the cir-
culation manager, and the assistant circulation man-
ager. Under these categories are five division man-
agers, one each for city home delivery, suburban
and country, newsstand and street sales, night cir-
culation, and the service department. The parties
agree that all of the above positions are managerial
and are excluded from the bargaining unit. The
Employer, however, contends that the various
managers in charge of the actual distribution and
delivery of the newspapers on a daily basis are su-
pervisory and/or managerial employees who
should also be excluded from the unit. These in-
clude the home delivery managers, the assistant
home delivery managers, the suburban traveling
representatives, the assistant news and street sales
managers, the assistant night circulation manager,
and the service desk managers.
There are four home delivery managers under
the city home delivery manager. They are assigned
to one of four specific geographical areas-the Dis-
trict of Columbia, Prince Georges County, Mont-
gomery County, and Virginia. These managers are
responsible for the home delivery of newspapers
through the use of independent contract distribu-
tors.4 2 The distributors, who utilize carriers to de-
liver the newspapers, are independent contractors
and not employees of the Post. There are approxi-
mately 38 to 58 distributors in each geographic
area. At a level between the 4 home delivery man-
agers and the independent distributors are 15 assis-
tant home delivery managers who work within a
specific part of the wider geographic areas.
The home delivery managers are responsible for
the delivery of the newspaper in their assigned
geographic areas. In performing their duties, they
travel in company automobiles. In overseeing the
delivery of the newspaper and collection of the
money due for receipt of the paper, the home de-
livery managers are involved in locating and con-
tracting with independent distributors. It is undis-
puted that the home delivery managers make rec-
ommendations on hiring and termination of the in-
dependent contractors, but that the final determina-
tion and signing of the contract is carried out by
superiors, sometimes by the vice president of circu-
lation, but most often by the division manager of
city home delivery. Another key function of the
home delivery manager involves setting rates the
distributors receive for delivering the newspaper.
Each contract rate varies according to the particu-
lar circumstances of the distributors' route. These
rates are determined in the first instance by home
delivery managers and assistant home delivery
managers, and appear to be based on guidelines
promulgated by the Employer. Although the home
delivery manager may be the employee who con-
tacts the prospective distributor, higher managerial
personnel are responsible for approving and signing
the contract for any individual distributor. More-
over, while a home delivery manager may make
recommendations regarding rate changes because
of cost and other factors, it is clear that these
changes require clearance from the city home de-
livery manager or other higher authority. Finally,
42 These distributors were also referred to in the record as dealers and
agents. Although a distributor, a dealer, and an agent perform somewhat
different functions, the parties are in agreement that for purposes of this
case their specific functions are not relevant to the determination of the
status of the positions involved here.
181
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the home delivery managers are active in determin-
ing credits for distributors when necessary. How-
ever, it appears that these adjustments are based on
established company guidelines.
The home delivery managers approve vacation
and time off for the assistant home delivery manag-
ers and may change an assistant home delivery
manager's territory under emergency circum-
stances. It also appears that the home delivery
managers make recommendations for the hire of as-
sistant home delivery managers, but that they do
not make such determinations themselves.
The assistant home delivery managers, suburban
traveling representatives, and assistant newsstand
and street sales managers also work in the field to
distribute the newspaper. Both parties are in sub-
stantial agreement that the assistant home delivery
managers, the suburban and country representa-
tives, and the assistant newsstand and street sales
managers perform virtually identical tasks. Accord-
ingly, we will discuss them as a group, noting the
differences in job functions where relevant.
There are a total of 15 assistant home delivery
managers who, as noted above, work under a par-
ticular home delivery manager in a particular geo-
graphic territory. Each assistant home delivery
manager deals with between 6 and 15 distributors.
It appears that the assistant home delivery manag-
ers are salaried, set their own hours, and have the
use of a company vehicle when covering their par-
ticular geographic work area. In fact, they spend
most of their time working in the field. The assis-
tant home delivery managers, like the home deliv-
ery managers, recruit prospective distributors and
make recommendations to the home delivery man-
agers for approval. The assistant home delivery
managers negotiate contracts with the distributors
and compute contract rates; these contracts are
sent to the city home delivery manager and are
eventually signed by the vice president of circula-
tion. The assistant home delivery managers take re-
sponsibility for training the distributors. They also
maintain records on newspaper stops and starts, as
well as on complaints. When goals are set for par-
ticular geographic areas, the assistant home deliv-
ery managers set the specific quota for individual
distributors within their area. Finally, the assistant
home delivery managers are involved in making
adjustments which give distributors credit for lost
or damaged newspapers.
There are six suburban and country traveling
representatives who report to their division man-
ager. They are responsible for home delivery in far
suburban areas and operate similarly to the assistant
home delivery managers. Indeed, except for the
difference in geographic areas, the record shows,
and the parties agree, that their duties are identical
to that of the assistant home delivery managers.
Finally, there are three assistant newsstand and
street sales managers who report to their division
manager. They are responsible for the sale of the
papers through distributors who place newspapers
in coin operated newsstands, in stores, and with
street vendors. One of the three assistant newsstand
and street sales managers spends most of his work-
ing time at the loading dock distributing newspa-
pers through dealers. In this capacity, he may
adjust the number of newspapers for a particular
distributor, as necessary. There are also nine part-
time workers who deliver newspapers to all night
stores in the Washington metropolitan area. The
record indicates that these part-time employees are
hired directly by an assistant newsstand and street
sales manager without discussion with the manager
of the division. The two remaining assistant manag-
ers divide in half the distribution area geographi-
cally, and are responsible for insuring the delivery
of the newspaper by the distributors in their par-
ticular area. These assistant managers spend ap-
proximately half their time outside the office per-
forming this function and the other half in the
office checking returns, and making weekly reports
on sales and revenues. It also appears that these as-
sistant managers are involved in the training of the
20 distributors under each of their respective juris-
dictions.
We conclude based on the foregoing that the
home delivery managers are supervisors within the
meaning of the Act. It appears that they make ef-
fective recommendations with respect to the hiring
and termination of assistant home delivery manag-
ers and that they have overall responsibility for
their large geographic areas. While we take cogni-
zance of the Union's argument that much of the
home delivery managers' worktime is spent in a
fashion similar to that of the assistant home deliv-
ery manager, we cannot ignore the probative evi-
dence which supports our determination here. We
therefore conclude that the home delivery manag-
ers are supervisors who should be excluded from
the unit.
However, we conclude, contrary to the Employ-
er, that assistant home delivery managers, the sub-
urban and country traveling representatives, and
the assistant newsstand and street sales managers
are not managerial employees within the meaning
of the Act. The record in this case does not estab-
lish that the assistant managers sufficiently make
use of independent judgment or exercise their own
discretion with respect to significant management
policy in performing their duties. Thus, as the Em-
ployer concedes, the assistant managers do not set
182
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
the rates to be received, but merely compute them
under a formula prescribed by the Employer.
Moreover, the Employer concedes that the assis-
tant managers do not independently enter into or
cancel contracts, nor do they commit the Employ-
er "to the number of such persons used and to the
compensation they receive."4 3 Thus, unlike the sit-
uation in the recently decided Eugene Register
Guard case, it cannot be said that the duties of the
assistant managers involved here require much
more than filling in contracts, or that their work
does not depend on clearance from higher manage-
ment. That they may make adjustments of credits
for lost or damaged newspaper does not convert
them from employee status to managerial status,
because such determinations are made within
guidelines and are reviewed by higher manage-
ment. For these reasons, we do not find these em-
ployees to be managerial employees who should be
excluded from the unit.4 4
The Employer also claims that the assistant
newsstand and street sales managers are supervisors
because they have authority to hire "part-time"
employees. These part-time employees deliver
papers to night stores and work 2 hours a night, 6
nights a week. The Employer's claim regarding the
hiring function of assistant newsstand and street
sales managers with respect to these employees is
not borne out by the record. Thus, at the hearing,
the newsstand and street sales manager did not tes-
'J See Guard Publishing Company. d/b/a Eugene Register Guard, 237
NLRB 205, 206 (1978).
"4 The Employer's reliance on, inter alia, Aeronca Inc., 221 NLRB 326
(1975), and Garden Island Publishing Co., Ltd., 154 NLRB 697 (1965), is
misplaced. In Aeronca the estimators whom the employer sought to ex-
clude as managerial not only prepared projections of the cost of perfor-
mance contracts on which the employer intended to bid (including ex-
pected profits), but were "instrumental in setting prices" as well as assist-
ing in the negotiation of contracts with customers. Moreover, the estima-
tors in that case had occasion to contact the director of industrial rela-
tions to obtain projections of labor rates in future years including figures
the company expected to negotiate with the union. Thus, these estimators
differ from the assistant managers here, who use a formula promulgated
by the Employer in determining the projected rates, which rates are sub-
sequently approved by higher management. Further, in Garden Island
Publishing, the Board found the manager of the circulation department a
managerial employee because, inter alia, she billed all the circulation ac-
counts, directed the work of the newspaper carriers, including collecting
money from them, and hired and fired; i.e., supervised the carriers. The
Board noted there that the manager was, in fact, the head of the circula-
tion department and thus clearly an agent of management. This position
would seem more similar to the home delivery manager or the city home
delivery manager whom we have excluded here, and not the assistant
managers whose authority is much more circumscribed than that set forth
in Garden Island Publishing.
The Employer also asserts that those whose exclusion it seeks in the
circulation department should be excluded because of the "special labor
relations history of that department." The Employer notes that it con-
verted many of its district managers to independent contractors between
1953 and 1954, and claims that the circulation managers involved here
were included in the Guild contract only to preserve pension and welfare
funds. However, it is clear that the circulation managers are employees of
the Company, have been included in the unit in the past, and are specifi-
cally included by reference in the Board-certified unit.
tify that all assistant newsstand and street sales
managers hire part-timers, but rather that one des-
ignated assistant manager handles such hiring at
any particular time. Thus assistant newsstand and
street sales manager, Land, at one time handled this
task, but then was replaced by assistant newsstand
and street manager, Terrell. According to the testi-
mony of the newsstand and street sales manager, at
the time of the hearing, only Terrell would handle
the hiring. The record also indicates that names of
potential deliverers are posted on a sheet of paper
on a bulletin board in the newsstand and street
sales office, and that names are taken from that list
for replacements as positions become available.
Moreover, at the hearing, there was a dispute as to
whether these part-time "employees" were employ-
ees within the meaning of the Act or, indeed,
whether they were employees who came under the
contract in effect between the Employer and Union
between 1974 and 1976. In the record, these part-
timers were described as "noncontinuity part-time
employees" and it appears that they do not go
through the normal hiring procedure used by the
Post; i.e., these part-timers are not hired through
the personnel department of the Post but are pro-
cessed exclusively through the newsstand and
street sales department.
In The Suburban Newspaper Group-Moorestown
News, Inc., 195 NLRB 438 (1972), the Board con-
fronted a similar situation. There, the employer
claimed that district managers were supervisors
over carriers. The Board found, however, that the
"record not only fails to demonstrate that the
hiring and replacement of carriers and the determi-
nations of whether they will receive bonuses re-
quire the exercise of discretion or independent
judgment, or that the district managers responsibly
direct the carriers, but, more fundamentally, also
fails to establish that carriers are employees and
not independent contractors as the Employer holds
out to the public." Here, where the status of the
part-time deliverers has not been clarified either in
the record or in the parties' briefs, we do not be-
lieve that a finding of supervisory status based on
the hiring and control of nine part-timers who
work 2 hours a night, 6 nights a week establishes
conclusively that the assistant newsstand and street
sales managers are supervisors. At best, as noted
above, only one assistant manager could be found
to be a supervisor because the record testimony in-
dicates that only one such assistant manager is in
charge of the hiring of these part-timers.4 5 We also
45 In this regard, we note that at the hearing the Union apparently as-
serted that only employees who worked 16 hours or more were part-time
employees under the contract and employees within the meaning of the
Act. We need not pass on this contention here.
183
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
note that in Suburban Newspaper Group, the Board
did not find the district supervisors possessed su-
pervisory status, even though they allegedly had
authority with respect to part-timers who per-
formed various tasks, such as delivering papers and
riding as helpers on trucks. It is clear that the con-
trol and supervision of the part-timers here is rou-
tine and does not require the use of independent
judgment. The record does not show that the assis-
tant managers use discretion or independent judg-
ment in the hiring of the nine part-timers. In such
circumstances, we cannot conclude that the assis-
tant manager involved with these part-timers is a
supervisor who should be excluded from the unit.
The night circulation department ensures that
the newspapers scheduled for delivery are loaded
on the distributors' trucks. The night circulation
manager, who usually works Tuesday through Sat-
urday nights, is in charge of the department. Under
him are two assistant night circulation managers, at
issue here as alleged supervisory and managerial
employees, who split the remainder of the weekly
shifts between them. They are responsible for run-
ning the dock area at the Company's building
where the papers are loaded on to the trucks. The
assistant night circulation managers determine the
order in which the trucks should receive their
papers so that the process is completed in a timely
manner and the papers delivered promptly. The
majority of their working time is spent making sure
that these trucks are "moving" to their destina-
tions. During the process of loading the trucks, the
assistant night circulation managers may also order
extra papers to be run if necessary in order to expe-
dite or otherwise improve the process on a particu-
lar day. In addition to overseeing the loading of
the papers for the distributors, the assistant night
circulation managers have responsibility for seeing
that single mail copies are sent to the appropriate
destination. These are sent via the post office, as
well as to the major bus terminals, the train station,
and the airport, for further delivery. There are four
full-time and nine part-time drivers who comprise
the "bus and baggage" staff who make these latter
deliveries. The assistant night circulation managers'
duties also include office work such as taking in-
ventories and reviewing orders. The assistant man-
agers are responsible for the maintenance of the
company's trucks, and in this connection they keep
records and send the trucks for basic maintenance.
The assistant managers also file reports regarding
the workday in the night circulation department.
We cannot agree with the Employer that the as-
sistant night circulation managers are managerial or
supervisory employees. Determining the order in
which trucks are loaded does not, in our opinion,
constitute managerial discretion under Board prece-
dent. To the contrary, this responsibility appears to
be more in the nature of a routine decision de-
signed to effectuate the Employer's need to have
papers delivered to the proper location for ultimate
delivery to the customer. So, too, the assistant
night circulation managers' decision to order extra
papers run, although obviously committing the
Employer to expend more capital for its business, is
not the exercise of true managerial discretion.4 6
Nor can we agree that the assistant night circula-
tion managers' involvement in hiring bus and bag-
gage employees shows that the assistant night cir-
culation managers are supervisors. The record indi-
cates that one of the assistant night circulation
managers hired four part-time drivers during the
vacation absence of the night circulation manager.
However, it appears that the assistant night circula-
tion manager had discussed this hiring prospect
with the night circulation manager beforehand, and
that the latter had told the assistant night circula-
tion manager that temporaries who had worked
during a prior strike were to be hired if openings
occurred. It appears that it is these employees who
were hired by the assistant night circulation man-
ager to fill the part-time positions. The record does
show that the night circulation manager usually in-
terviews an employee after the applicant speaks to
an assistant night circulation manager. The forego-
ing does not show that the assistant night circula-
tion manager exercises independent discretion or
judgment in hiring employees. To the contrary, it
shows that the assistant night circulation manager
merely carried out the directives of the night circu-
lation manager; this sporadic exercise of authority
cannot support a supervisory finding here.4 7
Also included within the circulation department
is the service desk, headed by the service depart-
ment manager. There are also 3 service desk assis-
tant managers, whose status is at issue here, and 9
full-time and approximately 50 part-time clerks and
routers. This department receives telephone calls
from customers regarding circulation. These calls
include complaints about nondelivery or late deliv-
ery of the newspaper, requests for new subscrip-
46 Moore-McCormack Lines. Incorporated, 181 NLRB 510 (1970), does
not support the Employer's contention that the assistant night circulation
managers are managerial employees. The Board noted there that cargo
supervisors perform work "of managerial nature" because their duties in-
volved planning and execution of plans for cargo loading. The Board fur-
ther found, however, that "it does not appear [the cargo supervisors] per-
form any functions similar to those of the employees in the unit" and thus
did not have sufficient community of interest with the clerical employees
sought to warrant inclusion in the unit. These facts obviously are differ-
ent from those presented before us here, since the instant managers' deci-
sions are routine, and their work functions are similar to those of other
unit employees.
47 See, e.g., Directors Guild of America, Inc. (Association of Motion Pic-
ture d Television Producers Inc.), 198 NLRB 707 (1972).
184
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
tions, or for suspension during vacation of current
subscriptions, address changes, and the like. Em-
ployees also receive calls for distributors during the
morning delivery time. The department operates 7
days a week, 5 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily, and 5 a.m. to 2
p.m. Sunday. The service desk assistant managers 48
sit in front of the service rows facing the clerks
and routers. Each service desk assistant manager
has a switchboard for monitoring employee con-
duct during telephone calls. The assistant managers
may also take calls in emergencies and handle com-
plaints, especially from persistent callers. When the
service department opens for business at 5 a.m.,
there are two employees and one assistant manager
who work from opening until 7 a.m. By 7 a.m., 20
to 25 more employees, as well as one more of the
assistant managers, arrive for work. By 10 a.m., the
third assistant manager arrives. There usually are
between 20 and 25 employees on duty throughout
the remainder of the day.
The service department manager handles sched-
uling, vacations, and time off, and makes final de-
terminations on hiring and discharge. The record
indicates that service desk assistant managers inter-
view applicants and make recommendations for
hiring on some occasions. Sometimes, these are the
only interviews conducted by the service depart-
ment, but the qualification of the applicant is inde-
pendently reviewed by the department manager or
vice president of circulation. The service desk as-
sistant managers have been involved in verbal and
written disciplinary matters. It appears that, espe-
cially with respect to written reprimands, the prob-
lem is first discussed by the assistant manager with
the service department manager, who signs the rep-
rimand. Service desk assistant managers have made
recommendations for promotions, but again, as
with hiring, the service department manager or
higher personnel make the final determination. The
service desk assistant managers are also involved in
calling in on-call clerks and routers when neces-
sary. This is done from a list which is maintained
in the department.
Based on the foregoing, we do not agree with
the Employer that the service desk managers are
supervisory employees. All the assistant managers
perform a quality control function to insure proper
work by the clerks and routers. The record indi-
cates that in almost all instances problems are re-
ferred to the service department manager. We do
not deem it controlling that service desk assistant
managers are present in the department when the
service department manager is not. It is clear that
4" The Company refers to these employees as service desk assistant
managers; the Union, referring to the same employees, calls them circula-
lion department supervisors.
the assistant managers' jobs follow clear, routine
patterns, and do not afford a basis for finding effec-
tive supervisory substitution.
C. Promotions, Research, and Public Relations
The Employer maintains separate departments
for promotions, research, and public relations, re-
spectively, which fall under the jurisdiction of the
vice president for communications. These depart-
ments are responsible for promoting the use of the
newspaper as an advertising media, for handling
the Employer's advertising needs, and for maintain-
ing and improving community relations. The Em-
ployer seeks to exclude the promotions manager,4 9
the art director, the assistant market research man-
ager, and the assistant public relations manager
from these departments.
The promotions department is headed by the
promotions manager and also includes an art direc-
tor, three copywriters, three clerks, a secretary,
and an artist. This department operates as an in-
house ad agency, producing media advertisements,
promulgating advertising sales material, creating
audiovisual presentations, and assisting in advertis-
ing and circulation promotions. The art director is
responsible for seeing that the promotion depart-
ment's art requirements are met. In so doing, she
does a variety of work, including layouts, pasteups,
planning, and creative thinking. In performing
these functions, the art director works with the one
full-time artist in the department and free lance art-
ists, we contract to perform specific jobs. The art
49 Testimony by the Employer's vice president for labor relations indi-
cates that the promotions department originally was divided into a cre-
ative services division and a research division, with separate managers for
each. Both of these reported to the director of promotions. However, tes-
timony indicates that the director of promotions resigned just prior to the
completion of the hearing in this case, and that the position of creative
services manager was abolished along with that of director of promo-
tions. The Employer asserts that the division of research became a sepa-
rate department and that Tortorello, the former head of creative services
became promotions manager. The Union claims that there is "no evi-
dence in the record indicating that these contentions are true or if true
what duties are encompassed by" the new position of promotions man-
ager. The Union thus asserts that the creative services manager should be
included in the unit, but does not discuss, and thus takes no position on,
the status of the promotions manager. On the other hand, the Employer
maintains that the creative services manager historically has been ex-
cluded from the unit, and thus the elevation of Tortorello from creative
services manager to promotions manager likewise requires her exclusion
from the unit here. Contrary to the Union's argument, the Company did
submit a revised organization chart for the communications department
which shows the existence of the promotions manager, and the labor re-
lations manager testified that such a position existed. However, no further
evidence was presented on the promotions manager position, although
Tortorello testified earlier in the proceeding about the creative services
manager position. From the above, we conclude it is unnecessary to
decide the status of the Tortorello position, since the Employer asserts
that the creative services manager position no longer exists, and the
Union does not argue the status of the promotions manager position. In
these circumstances, we find a discussion of the creative services manager
position would be moot, and an analysis of the promotions manager posi-
tion unwarranted.
185
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
director determines whether a promotions project
can be done in-house or must be contracted out to
free lance artists for illustrations or mechanical or
design work. The art director has a $30,000 budget
to use for free lance work. Free lance assignments
are made approximately two times a week. It ap-
pears that in the past the director of promotions
has final authority over the use of free lance artists.
With respect to the artist, the art director makes
assignments of art projects for the artist to perform
and review the art work on an artistic basis similar
to that used with the free lancers. However, the
work assignments are based on certain consider-
ations such as style or type of skill needed to per-
form the project.
The Employer asserts that the art director super-
vises the artist in the promotions department. We
cannot agree with this assertion. We note that, de-
spite the apparent reorganization within the promo-
tions department, the record indicates that both the
former director of promotions and the current pro-
motions manager are in charge of the department
and are involved in insuring that the art work is
completed. Moreover, it appears that the assign-
ment of work made by the art director to the artist
does not involve that sort of discretion or indepen-
dent judgment which warrants a supervisory find-
ing. Further, we cannot agree with the Employer's
assertion that the art director's authority to use free
lance artists makes him a managerial employee.
While the record does indicate that the art director
contacts artists whom the art director desires50
such contracting is within the prescribed budget
that the Employer maintains for this aspect of the
promotions department. Nor do we agree that be-
cause the art director is responsible for determining
when promotions department art work must be
performed by free lancers as opposed to the pro-
motions department artists, a potential conflict
exists because the art director must decide whether
to use a unit employee or a free lancer. In this
regard, the record indicates that free lancers are
used because of such factors as techniques or com-
plexity, or the availability of in-house artists. Thus,
there appears to be little possibility of conflict of
interest.
The Employer's research department supplies
market research and media information to the sales
staff of the promotion department and other Post
departments to assist in selling the newspaper as an
advertising media. Employees of this department
gather material for brochures and other advertising
materials to accomplish these goals. The market re-
search department was formerly part of the promo-
0o But as noted above, the art director's superiors have indicated in the
past whether they approve or disapprove the use of certain free lancers.
tions department, but now comes under the direc-
tion of the communications vice president. The de-
partment is directed by a manager, whom the par-
ties agree is excluded. Also included in the unit are
an assistant manager, three market analysts, and a
secretary.
The assistant market research manager position
was created in 1976, and the Employer now alleges
that it is a supervisory and managerial position.
The assistant manager hired in 1976, Carla
Koeffler, had expertise in multimedia analysis and
was hired specifically for her knowledge of televi-
sion broadcast and research methods. Like the
manager, the assistant market research manager
works with the three market analysts in gathering
and supplying research and other information to
the Company. In line with the department's empha-
sis on multimedia analysis, the assistant market re-
search manager formulates and effectuates new
programs designed to aid in market research strate-
gies. For example, the assistant manager imple-
mented a monthly analysis of Arbitron rating books
to obtain a "television perspective" so that employ-
ees trying to sell the Post advertising could under-
stand the nature of television advertising, and the
difference between that media and the newspaper
media. The assistant market research manager has
also created a slide chart to assist in the presenta-
tion of the market survey information. In perform-
ing these tasks, the assistant manager makes use of
the three market analysts and has helped train them
to use the new sources of information that the as-
sistant manager brought to the attention of the de-
partment. The record indicates also that the market
analysts have specific areas of expertise and that
they have been performing various projects for
many years.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the as-
sistant market research manager is neither a super-
visory nor a managerial employee. The use that the
assistant market research manager makes of the
market analysts is not supervisory in nature, but
rather the assistant market research manager and
the analysts work as a team involved in the
common goal of securing necessary information for
the department. The record indicates that these
market analysts have their own research projects
and that the assistant manager was brought in for
expertise in helping to enlarge the research scope
of the department. Such technical direction does
not imbue the assistant market research manager
with supervisory authority.51 Nor do we find this
b1 The Employer asserted that the assistant market research manager
hired and trained three temporary typists. We note first that it does not
appear that these temporary typists were employees within the meaning
Continued
186
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
position to be managerial. In our view, the mere
gathering and study of information designed to in-
crease the Employer's advertising market does not
show that the employee here has the authority to
formulate, determine, or effectuate employer
policy, or otherwise is so closely related to man-
agement as to require her exclusion.
The Employer's public relations department was
established in 1972 as an independent division. Its
duties include handling the Post's community rela-
tions and publicity needs, and to some extent its in-
ternal communications. The department includes a
public relations manager, who is excluded from the
unit, as well as an assistant manager, who is at issue
here, three part-time tour guides, two writers, a
clerk, and a secretary. The position of assistant
public relations manager was created in 1976. At
that time, it was filled by the then public relations
supervisor, who also had served as secretary and
representative in the public relations department. It
appears that the responsibilities of the individual
who filled the assistant manager position have re-
mained relatively constant, except that apparently
the assistant manager now substitutes for the public
relations manager when the latter is not present in
the office.
The assistant public relations manager responds
to mail, writes and distributes publicity releases,
takes responsibility for the Company's newsletter,
and is in charge of the Employer's tour program.
The newsletter is an in-house publication for em-
ployees of the Company. One of the two writers in
the department performs the day-to-day work in-
volved in producing that newsletter. It appears that
the assistant manager suggests stories and reviews
the work upon completion. The assistant manager
has also made recommendations to the public rela-
tions manager regarding the hiring of the individ-
ual to fill the newsletter writing position. Another
aspect of the assistant public relations manager's
job involves publicity and entertainment events for
the Company. These include such matters as com-
pany circuses, book luncheons, and the like. The
one clerk in the department is also involved in ar-
ranging the events, including reserving rooms, se-
curing speakers, and distributing tickets. Finally,
the assistant public relations manager has primary
responsibility for the three part-time tour guides
who lead tours of the Company and who work 2
days a week, 7 hours a day. Thus, the record indi-
cates that the assistant manager hires the tour
guides, trains them, and schedules their hours. The
of the Act. Secondly, even if they are, it appears that the manager of the
department was also involved in these hires, which involved the person-
nel department sending three typists, one after the other, to perform a
particular task which two typists found they could not perform.
assistant manager may also lead such tours for spe-
cial visitors or when a substitute tour guide is
needed.
Based on the undisputed fact that the assistant
public relations manager has the primary duty of
hiring the part-time tour guides for the public rela-
tions department, we conclude that the assistant
public relations manager is a supervisor within the
meaning of the Act. While we do not believe that
the other functions and duties of the assistant
public relations manager indicate supervisory au-
thority, we find that the exercise of discretion in
hiring and selecting the tour guides warrants this
finding.
D. Administrative Services Department
This department provides support services for
the Company and consists of sections for printing,
telephone centrex, building services, mail, purchas-
ing, and travel. The administrative service manager
and his assistant are in charge of this department.
They are excluded from the unit by agreement.
The assistant manager for administrative services is
responsible for the duplicating (printing) services
and telephone operations.
The printing services section of the department
produces in-house printing of materials used inside
the Company as well as those used on the outside
for promotions. The section is headed by the print-
ing services supervisor 5 2 at issue here, who is sub-
ordinate to the assistant manager for administrative
services. The section also employs four full-time
and three part-time employees. One full-time em-
ployee is designated a "coordinator" and is in-
volved in computing costs of jobs for accounting
purposes and handling travel directories, as well as
ordering materials as discussed below. The three
remaining full-time employees and three part-time
employees operate three large presses and conco-
mittant auxiliary equipment. The section is fully
equipped to produce, inter alia, forms, letters, and
promotional pieces. The department operates on
one shift, all full-time employees working similar
hours; the part-timers work as needed on an on-call
basis. The printing service supervisor determines
the necessity for increased manpower and calls in
the part-timers on this basis.
As printing work comes into the section, it is as-
signed by the printing services supervisor to the
appropriate machine for completion. Employees in
the department work on all machines on a rotating
basis. The printing services supervisor, who has
made recommendations with respect to which ma-
chines the Employer should purchase, is charged
S2 This position at one time was called the duplicating supervisor
187
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
with training the clerks who run the machines. The
printing services supervisor also spends somewhat
less than half of his workday running machines.
The remainder of the printing services supervisor's
workday is spent on paper work, including deter-
mining the need for repairs and supplies. In this
regard, the printing services supervisor has author-
ity to order supplies such as paper and inks within
a limited amount, and likewise, in certain circum-
stances, may send machines out for repair, or call a
repairman as needed; if a large expenditure of over
$800 is involved, clearance by the assistant man-
ager is required. The "employee coordinator" also
is involved in this process in that he may carry out
the orders of the printing services supervisor or
may effectuate repairs or orders of supplies when
the printing services supervisor is not present in the
department.
With respect to hiring, reprimand, and discharge,
the record indicates that the printing services su-
pervisor is consulted by higher management, but
that final determinations are made by superiors.
The printing supervisor has informed the adminis-
trative services manager of an outstanding perfor-
mance by an employee. However, the manager
made the decision to grant the employee a merit in-
crease. Further, although vacations are scheduled
by the printing services supervisor, such vacations
are accorded only when the manning requirements
of the department can be met. Further, overtime
may be required of the machine operators by the
printing services supervisor, but such overtime is
subject to an allowance which must be controlled;
if overtime is to exceed a certain amount, it must
be cleared by superiors.
Based on these facts, we conclude, in agreement
with the Union, that the printing service supervisor
is more akin to a leadman than a supervisory or
managerial employee, as urged by the Employer.
The ordering of supplies and repairs is not the
"pledging of employer credit" which the Board has
found to support a finding of managerial employee.
Nor is the selection of repair services, or training,
that sort of managerial authority which involves in-
dependent discretion or actions outside the Em-
ployer's guidelines which convert an otherwise
rank-and-file employee into a managerial employee.
The record clearly shows that, like a leadman, the
printing service supervisor spends a large percent-
age of the workday operating printing machines.
The remainder of the time is spent fulfilling routine
administrative tasks such as those mentioned above.
In these circumstances, we do not find this employ-
ee to be a supervisor.
The Employer maintains a centrex switchboard
to handle all incoming and outgoing telephone calls
for the Company. It operates 7 days a week, 24
hours a day, and encompasses three shifts. In addi-
tion to the chief telephone operator, whom the
Employer claims is a supervisor and managerial
employee, the department includes eight full-time
and five part-time operators. The chief telephone
operator works from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., so that her
shift includes the day shift and overlaps part of the
night shift. The chief operator works on the
switchboard approximately 20 percent of the time,
usually in relief of the other operators. The chief
telephone operator is responsible for recordkeep-
ing, including overtime reports, part-time reports,
and watts and long distance reports; these are done
on a weekly and monthly basis. The chief tele-
phone operator also prepares the work schedules
for the operators. These schedules appear to be
based on seniority, with full-time operators having
first selection and permanent part-time employees
the next selection, followed by the two relief oper-
ators. As for work assignment, most operators can
handle any individual position, although selected
individuals handle special calls. The record indi-
cates that the chief telephone operator has inter-
viewed prospective operators and has been in-
volved in reprimands or discharge, although in
these latter instances the assistant manager or ad-
ministrative services manager has also been closely
involved. The record also shows that the chief tele-
phone operator has hired two part-time employees
without further review by higher supervisors. In
addition to these duties, the chief telephone opera-
tor also orders supplies for the telephone section.
In this regard, the chief telephone operator, togeth-
er with the assistant manager, meets with represen-
tatives of the telephone company to decide what
equipment best suits the needs of the Employer.
As the record indicates that the chief telephone
operator has independently hired employees in the
section, we find that the chief telephone operator is
a supervisor within the meaning of the Act.
Within the administrative services department is
the building services division, which is headed by a
manager who is already excluded from the unit.53
Reporting to the building services manager is the
supervisor of composing room assistants, whom the
Employer claims is a supervisor under the Act.
There are seven to nine composing room assis-
tants who perform janitorial cleanup in the com-
posing room. They sweep floors around the com-
posing room machines, gather metal slugs, work a
remelting machine, and perform other cleanup
work in the composing room. The composing
'a Under the building services manager is a building services supervi-
sor who is the manager at night, and is excluded from the unit as well.
188
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
room assistants work on a 24-hour, three-shift
workday. The supervisor and six employees start at
4:30 a.m.; one employee works evenings, and an-
other two work on the morning shifts. The super-
visor of composing room assistants performs
cleanup when necessary to fill out a crew. He also
keeps track of stock and inventory. Scheduling of
composing room assistants is done by the supervi-
sor, usually on a seniority system. Overtime is dis-
tributed by the supervisor equally between the
composing room assistants. The supervisor of com-
posing room assistants also has issued written repri-
mands and hired an assistant without further
review by company officials.
Based on these facts, we conclude that the super-
visor of composing room assistants is a statutory
supervisor. We note specifically the uncontroverted
testimony that Byrd, as supervisor of composing
room assistants, hired an employee without further
review by higher management, and that written
reprimands have issued under the signature of the
supervisor of composing room assistants, again
without review by the building services manager
or administrative services assistant manager. For
these reasons, the supervisor of composing room
assistants must be excluded from the unit.
The Employer's purchasing department is re-
sponsible for buying supplies and materials for the
Company.5 4 The department is headed by the pur-
chasing manager, Robert Dawn, who is excluded
from the unit. Dawn reviews requisitions for goods
and services forwarded by various departments to
the purchasing department. He also receives a
weekly inventory of critical supplies which he
monitors in order to maintain these supplies at an
operating level. Dawn interviews potential suppli-
ers, and may negotiate terms and prices with ven-
dors. Moreover, he is responsible for the sale or
disposal of surplus equipment.
The assistant purchasing manager, who the Em-
ployer claims is a supervisor and managerial em-
ployee, works under the purchasing manager. The
department also includes a secretary, a purchasing
clerk, and two full-time and one part-time stock-
room employees. The primary function of the assis-
tant purchasing manager involves the acquisition of
stock items. Indeed, both the purchasing manager
and the assistant purchasing manager spend ap-
proximately half of their time in the stock area de-
termining the need for items and reordering them.
Requests for items may also come from other de-
partments. There are department guidelines which
assist the purchasing agents when they seek to
secure items. Thus, the assistant purchasing man-
"' There are some exceptions to this responsibility, such as newsprint.
which is purchased through another department.
ager usually solicits three bids from vendors and
then, using price and quality as guidelines, selects
the most appropriate vendor for the Employer.
The assistant purchasing manager authorizes ap-
proximately 50 purchases a month. The total of the
inventory under the control of the assistant man-
ager approximates $500,000 and includes such items
as scotch tape, paper, and preprinted forms for data
processing. The monthly authorization falls be-
tween $25,000 and $50,000. The assistant manager
also has taken responsibility for drafting an evalua-
tion form for the employees in the purchasing de-
partment and will show managers in the adminis-
trative services section how to use that form. Al-
though there was testimony that the assistant pur-
chasing manager was told she could hire and dis-
charge, the record shows only that she has inter-
viewed and made recommendations on hiring.
However, the decision to hire employees has been
made by the purchasing manager. It also appears
that the purchasing manager is absent from the de-
partment approximately 6 to 8 weeks a year, at
which time the assistant purchasing manager han-
dles the duties of the department.
Based on the foregoing and the record as a
whole, we conclude that the assistant purchasing
manager is neither a managerial nor supervisory
employee under the Act. In Bell Aerospace, a Divi-
sion of Textron, Inc., 219 NLRB 384 (1975), the
Board found that buyers who "do not exercise suf-
ficient independent discretion in their jobs to truly
align them with management are employees, not
managerials, under the Act." As the Board had
noted in the earlier Bell Aerospace case, "[w]hile it
is true that buyers are in a position to commit the
Employer's credit, the record reveals that the dis-
cretion and latitude for independent action must
take place within the confines of the general direc-
tions which the Employer has established." (190
NLRB 431.) These precepts are readily applicable
to the authority of the assistant purchasing man-
ager here, who, although able to commit the Em-
ployer to purchasing stock items, must conform to
certain Employer guidelines and, on occasion, must
clear decisions with higher department or company
authorities.5 5 Further, with respect to the Employ-
er's supervisory claim, we note that were the assis-
tant purchasing manager found to be a supervisor,
there would be two supervisors and only four full-
time and one part-time employees in the depart-
ment. Although the record does indicate that the
assistant purchasing manager does make some rec-
ommendations with respect to hiring and transfer,
5b See also Barnes and Noble Bookstores, Inc.. 233 NLRB 1326, 1332-33
(1977); compare Simplex Industries, Inc., 243 NLRB II11 (1979).
189
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
such action appears sporadic. Similarly, scheduling
by the assistant manager is routine, We therefore
decline to find the assistant purchasing manager to
be a supervisory employee.5 6
E. Insurance Department
This department is responsible for the insurance
programs at the Post. It also handles various health
and welfare and pension plans, and administers
workmen's compensation claims. Approximately 10
employees work in the insurance department,
which is headed by Insurance Manager John
Cannon. The Employer asserts that the assistant
manager and the insurance administrator are super-
visory, managerial, and/or confidential employees
who should be excluded from the unit.
The assistant insurance manager position was
created in March 1977. The position was filled at
that time by Catherine Thompson, who was hired
by the insurance manager. Thompson was brought
into the department because of her expertise in
ERISA. 5 7 Thompson spends most of her worktime
studying pension plans, including the Guild pension
plan, at the direction of the insurance manager. In
performing this function, she calculates benefits for
employees under the various plans, and works on
data relating to benefits accumulated by employees
when they are terminated. The assistant insurance
manager also works or will be working in the
future on other insurance, such as fire, theft, and
casualty, and her duties will expand to include
claims handling and welfare benefits. The assistant
insurance manager also will be involved in calcu-
lating the cost of proposals for employee benefits
under the collective-bargaining agreement. In per-
forming her tasks, she has access to employee files.
The Employer argues first that Thompson was
recruited as a management trainee, is in a manage-
ment exempt plan for pension purposes, works
closely with the manager of the insurance depart-
ment, and is therefore a managerial employee. The
Employer next asserts that the assistant insurance
manager should be excluded as a confidential em-
ployee because of the nature of the material with
which she works, and the fact that she works with
the vice president for labor relations. Finally, the
Employer avers that the assistant insurance man-
S6 Also included in the administrative services department is the food
services division. The Employer asserted at the hearing that the manager
of the food services department was a supervisory/managerial employee
who should be excluded from the unit. The Union in its brief to the
Board and in its reply brief did not contest or mention the position of
food services manager. The record does indicate that the food services
manager, inter alia, has interviewed and hired employees without review
by superiors in the department. We thus conclude, in agreement with the
Employer, that the manager of food services is a supervisory employee
who should be excluded from the unit.
57 Employee Retirement Insurance Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C.
§1001, et seq.
ager is a supervisor because she directs the work of
a secretary and a clerk. We cannot agree with any
of these assertions.
We first reject the Employer's argument that the
position of assistant manager of insurance is similar
to that of the management trainees in Curtis Indus-
tries, Division of Curtis Noll Corporation.5 8 In that
case, unlike the instant case, the management train-
ees were precisely that; i.e., persons who were
training to advance into management positions and
who would leave the respondent's employ if they
did not so advance. These management trainees
were recruited and hired because of special educa-
tion backgrounds, and accepted employment with a
designated managerial goal in mind; remained with
the employer only if they successfully completed
the training program; and had dissimilar conditions
of employment from regular employees. Here,
unlike the situation in Curtis Industries, the assistant
manager of insurance is not involved in a training
program which will lead either to a higher man-
agement position or the prospect of leaving the
employ of the Post.
It is true, as the Employer points out, that the as-
sistant manager has a secretary and an office, and
participates in a pension plan which differs from
that of employees represented by the Guild. How-
ever, the assistant insurance manager spends the
majority of her time on insurance programs-spe-
cifically at this time ERISA-which is similar to
the function of other employees in the insurance
department. While we have no doubt that the assis-
tant manager is well educated and uniquely talent-
ed in her area of expertise, such facts do not con-
vert an experienced, knowledgeable employee into
a managerial employee. The assistant insurance
manager's close relationship with. the manager of
the department, although perhaps indicative of her
status as a valuable employee, does not, in itself,
dictate a conclusion that the assistant manager is a
managerial employee.
Nor does the assistant manager's access to confi-
dential information lead us to conclude that this
position is a confidential one under the Act. "The
Board has held that it will not exclude as 'confi-
dential' employees who merely have access to per-
sonnel or statistical information upon which an em-
ployer's labor relations policy is based; nor will it
exclude employees with access to labor relations
information after it has become known to the union
or the employees concerned." 5 9
While it is clear that Cannon, as insurance man-
ager, deals directly with the vice president for
`8 218 NLRB 1447 (1975) (then Member Fanning dissenting).
59 Pullman Standard Division of Pullman. Incorporated, 214 NLRB 762,
763 (1974).
190
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
labor relations during the course of collective-bar-
gaining negotiations, it does not follow necessarily
that the assistant in this department has a confiden-
tial relationship with that vice president. The Em-
ployer argues that because of Thompson's access to
information which is used by the Post's labor nego-
tiations, Thompson is a confidential employee
under Pullman Standard, supra. We do not agree.
In Pullman Standard, it was noted that employees
who were involved in estimating freight rates were
"privy to the precise labor rates to which the em-
ployer in pursuit of its own labor policy would be
willing to agree in some future collective-bargain-
ing agreement." 60 Accordingly, the Board found
them to be confidential employees. While the assis-
tant insurance manager here may calculate costs of
various insurance programs, this does not mean
that the assistant manager is "privy to precise labor
rates" used by the Employer's management negoti-
ating team."' Moreover, the assistant insurance
manager's job of studying pension plans and calcu-
lating benefits for employees under such plans, or
future benefits does not, in our opinion, create such
a conflict or so closely align the assistant insurance
manager with management as to mandate her ex-
clusion from the unit. Finally, we cannot agree
with the Employer that the minimal record evi-
dence on the relationship between the assistant in-
surance manager and her secretary and clerk indi-
cates that the assistant insurance manager is a su-
pervisor within the meaning of the Act. We there-
fore conclude, in agreement with the Union, that
the position of assistant insurance manager should
remain within the unit.
The insurance administrator, who the Post
claims is a supervisory, managerial, and confiden-
tial employee, is responsible for handling group in-
surance plans, enrolling new employees in insur-
ance plans, handling all insurance claims except
those made under the Guild's insurance program,
and handling all workmen compensation claims.
Working with the insurance administrator on these
jobs are one full-time and two part-time clerks.
Under company guidelines, the insurance adminis-
trator and the clerks can reject fraudulent or exces-
sive claims. However, the insurance administrator
reviews the work of the clerks.
The insurance administrator-at the time of the
hearing, Doris Grubbs-testified without contradic-
tion that she has hired clerks on her staff without
prior approval or review by the manager of the in-
surance department. It appears that prior to a
clerk's starting date, the insurance administrator in-
forms the insurance manager of these hires. Also, a
60 Pullmnan Standard, upra. 214 NLRB at 763.
e' Carling Brewing Company'. Incorporated. etc., 131 NlRB 441 (1961).
part-time clerk was hired in Grubbs' absence by
Manager Cannon; however, Cannon told Grubbs
that, if the employee did not meet the needs or de-
sires of the department, Grubbs could dismiss that
employee. Although the Union attempts to mini-
mize this evidence of supervisory status by noting
the high percentage of time spent by the insurance
administrator in processing claims, the undisputed
fact, as mentioned above, that the insurance admin-
istrator can hire or discharge employees in the de-
partment renders the insurance administrator a su-
pervisory employee who must be excluded from
the unit.
F. Employee Relations Department
The employee relations department consists of 22
employees, and is headed by the director of em-
ployee relations. The employee relations depart-
ment is responsible for various personnel matters,
including maintenance of employee records and
services, provision of training and development,
support and recruitment in employment, as well as
safety and security for the Employer. The Employ-
er asserts that the night employee relations man-
ager and the manager of training and development
should be excluded from the unit as supervisory,
managerial, or confidential employees.
In 1976, the Employer created the position of
night employee relations manager and appointed
Roscoe Crawford to the position. The night em-
ployee relations manager is the only employee
from the employee relations department working
during the evening shifts. Hence, he does not su-
pervise any employee relations department employ-
ee. The main function of the night employee rela-
tions manager is to provide department services
during the evening to those employees who work
at that time, including the mechanical force em-
ployees who produce the newspaper, and various
employees in the newsroom who do not have
access to the employee relations department during
the day. Thus, employees with complaints, or those
who are in need of job counseling, notify Crawford
of these problems. He then answers questions and
attempts to ameliorate the complaints. Examples of
the problems handled by the night employee rela-
tions manager include issuance of I.D. cards, an-
swering insurance questions, and explaining sick
and vacation leave plans. Crawford does not usual-
ly resolve grievances but attempts to secure an-
swers to problems that may lead to grievances. He
will advise the employee relations department di-
rector of problems encountered during the night
rounds.
Based on the foregoing, we agree with the
Union that the position of night employee relations
-
191
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
manager is neither supervisory, nor managerial, nor
confidential. It is conceded that Crawford super-
vises no employee relations department employees;
nonetheless, the Employer asserts that, because
Crawford deals with complaints and other griev-
ance-related problems, he is thereby a supervisory
employee. We do not agree. Thus, the record
shows that in "adjusting grievances" the employee
relations manager is performing nothing more than
the functions endemic to the employee relations de-
partment, and as such is routinely implementing de-
partment policy pursuant to Employer guidelines.
Crawford is not so much an adjuster of grievances,
as he is an answerer of questions. Nor do we find
persuasive the evidence relating to the alleged
managerial status of this position. While it is obvi-
ous, as the Employer urges, that the night employ-
ee relations manager is the only representative for
that department during those hours, it is nowhere
made plain that the functions of the night manager
are any different than those of the various other 22
employees within the employee relations depart-
ment. Perhaps recognizing that fact, the Employer
also asserts that the fact that the employee relations
manager at night meets with the executive vice
president for the Company, and that he has been
involved in developing communications vehicles
for management employees and setting up appren-
ticeship programs in the pressroom, aligns this em-
ployee with management. However, it is not so
clear, as the Employer urges, that the night em-
ployee relations manager "speaks for management,"
or that he has "substantial discretion and authority
in connection with the performance of his duties."
We decline to construe the night employee rela-
tions manager's duties as those involving formula-
tion or determination of management policy. Nor is
the evidence convincing that merely because the
night employee relations manager discusses matters
with the executive vice president or the vice presi-
dent for labor relations, he is "assisting or acting in
a confidential capacity to persons who formulate,
determine, and effectuate management policies in
the field of labor relations." That the night man-
ager for employee relations may monitor various
aspects of the job-employee services or records,
safety or security, training and development or re-
cruitment, or employment problems-does not con-
vert what are otherwise rank-and-file employee
duties to the level of managerial duties. Further,
the mere fact that the night employee relations
manager has access to personnel files or discusses
possible changes in procedures utilized for primar-
ily the mechanical employees does not render the
position confidential. We thus decline to exclude
the night employee relations manager from the
unit.
The manager of training and development is in
charge of designing, developing, and implementing
programs for management training and develop-
ment at the Post. Jerilyn Weaver, the incumbent,
testified at the hearing that she spends approxi-
mately half of her worktime actually training em-
ployees, and the remainder of the workday re-
searching and developing projects and evaluating
training programs. In presenting and developing
the training programs, the manager utilizes a
budget of approximately $25,000 a year. The train-
ing and development manager also oversees the
Employer's tuition refund program which has a
separate $20,000 yearly budget. Approximately 75-
80 percent of the programs developed by Weaver
are for management employees exclusively. It ap-
pears that the duties of this position were previous-
ly performed by the assistant director for employee
relations, a position which no longer exists but
which was previously specifically excluded from
the unit under the most recent collective-bargain-
ing agreement between the parties.
We agree with the Employer that Weaver is a
managerial employee under the Act. It is clear that
the manager of training and development has sole
descretion in performing and directing her pro-
grams which primarily involve management em-
ployees. We thus conclude that this position has
been shown to be a managerial one.
G. Accounting Department
The accounting department is headed by the
controller, and is responsible for keeping the Em-
ployer's books for account. The accounting depart-
ment is broken down into nine relatively small
units, each of which is headed by an administrative
assistant to the controller. The controller and all
the administrative assistants are, by agreement of
the parties, excluded from the bargaining unit. The
Employer asserts that 11 classifications in subunits
of the 9 basic units also should be excluded from
the collective-bargaining unit.
The administrative assistant for receivables, Cliff
Neal, heads three units which include advertising
accounts receivable, circulation accounts receiv-
able, and paper marking division. There are 22 em-
ployees in the accounts receivable department, in-
cluding 19 full-time and 2 part-time clerks. This
unit is responsible for processing insertions or sales
orders for advertisements which are sent to data
processing for preparation of bills and invoices, for
recording adjustments, and for preparing earned
192
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
and short rates statements.6 2 The Employer asserts
that the supervisor and assistant supervisor for ad-
vertising accounts receivable are supervisors under
Section 2(11) of the Act.
There are three groups of employees within the
advertising accounts receivable unit: those who
handle classified accounts, those who handle adver-
tising adjustment and national accounts, and those
who handle retail display accounts. The supervisor
of advertising accounts receivable, Chris Patterson,
reviews the work of the other employees in the
unit. Patterson also processes the short rates and
earned rates, handles problem accounts, and other-
wise deals with advertisers. Schedules for employ-
ees are set by Patterson, although it appears that
the employees in this department operate on a flex-
itime schedule. The supervisor of advertising ac-
counts receivable interviews prospective employees
and makes recommendations to the administrative
assistant of this unit. Similarly, with respect to dis-
charge, the administrative assistant would make the
final decision as to whether to fire an employee. It
appears that Patterson has evaluated probationary
employees, although the record does not indicate
whether there have been any negative evaluations,
or what the effect of such evaluations are. It also
appears from the record that on occasion Patterson
has hired temporary employees for the unit.
Gail Stefhon is the assistant advertising accounts
receivable supervisor. She heads the group which
handles retail display billing. There are seven
clerks who work in that group. 63 The retail dis-
play group is responsible for display paper marking
and tear sheet operations. Stefhon works with the
clerks, prepares reports and reviews the work of
the clerks, and also reviews the work of the other
units in accounts receivable. The assistant supervi-
sor in this unit has conducted interviews for posi-
tions, but as noted above, the supervisor and the
administrative assistant in this unit also conduct in-
terviews of prospective employees. The assistant
supervisor has assisted the supervisor in preparing
schedules for employees, and has made some rec-
ommendations with respect to promotion and merit
increases. Again, these recommendations are re-
viewed by administrative assistants and higher
company personnel. It also appears from the record
that Stefhon was involved in the discharge of a
temporary employee. When Patterson is on vaca-
tion or otherwise not at his desk, the assistant su-
pervisor substitutes for him.
62 "Earned rates" are statements for customers with large volumes of
lineage, and "short rates" are statements for customers who do not meet
the minimum contract requirement for lineage.
ea There are also two other employees who head the classified and ad-
vertising adjustment and national groups, respectively, which have four
and six employees each.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude, contrary
to the Employer, that neither the supervisor nor
the assistant supervisor of advertising accounts re-
ceivable are supervisors within the meaning of the
Act. We note that both Patterson and Stefhon per-
form functions on a daily basis that are part of the
normal duties and responsibilities of the advertising
accounts receivable division. Further, we note that
the administrative assistant in every instance has
final control over all decisions which are supervi-
sory in nature. In this regard, the Board has held
that the sporadic hiring and terminating of tempor-
aries does not convert a rank-and-file employee to
a statutory supervisor. Moreover, with respect to
the assistant advertising accounts receivable super-
visor, we note that the Employer does not claim
that the other two group leaders are supervisors,
although they perform work similar to Stefhon. In
urging the Board to find the assistant to be a super-
visor, the Employer relies primarily on the fact
that the assistant supervisor substitutes for the su-
pervisor of accounts receivable. However, this sub-
stitution is only during vacation and other short pe-
riods of time, and even were we to find the super-
visor to be a statutory supervisor, a conclusion we
do not make, we would not find such substitution
to be a basis for finding this rank-and-file employee
a supervisor within the meaning of Section 2(11).
Finally, the Employer argues that if administrative
assistant Neal is the only supervisor over the ac-
counts in the receivables department, a high super-
visory ratio of 1:45 would exist.6 4 However, the
Board has long held that, while probative, the ratio
of supervisors to employees is not determinative
where the remainder of the salient facts do not oth-
erwise indicate supervisory status. We therefore de-
cline to exclude these two positions which have
long been included within the recognized collec-
tive-bargaining unit represented by the Guild.
The circulation receivables unit prepares and
processes documents relating to circulation rev-
enue, including billing of dealers as well as billing
of mail and paid subscribers. Another one of the
functions of the circulation receivables unit is to
handle draws and adjustments of distributors. Eight
full-time employees work in the circulation receiv-
ables unit, including the supervisor for circulation
receivables, Jan Thompson, who the Employer as-
serts is a supervisor under the Act. Administrative
Assistant Neal is in overall charge of this section of
the receivables department. The duties of the su-
64 The Employer bases this figure on the fact that there are 45 em-
ployees in the 3 receivable sections. and if none of the other alleged su-
pervisors are found to be so, the ratio would be one supervisor (Neal) to
45 employees There are only 21 employees in the accounts receisable
section.
193
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
pervisor for circulation receivables include prepar-
ing monthly reports, maintaining circulation fig-
ures, and filling out insurance and tax reports.
There are various desks within the circulation re-
ceivables group which handle particular types of
work in the department. As with the supervisor of
advertising accounts receivables, the supervisor for
circulation receivables has interviewed and made
recommendations with respect to temporaries, and
has issued a reprimand to an employee in the de-
partment. However, it appears that Thompson dis-
cussed with Neal the circumstances surrounding
this reprimand and that Neal approved the actions
taken by Thompson. The supervisor in this group
also handles time off, vacations, and excused ab-
sences.
The above facts and the record as a whole indi-
cate that the supervisor of accounting circulation
receivables is not a statutory supervisor. The Em-
ployer admits that the supervisor performs such
work as the preparation of monthly reports and
circulation figures, but argues that additional duties
separate this supervisor from other employees in
the circulation receivables group. We do not agree.
Thus, the record shows that, although routine tasks
involving time off and vacations are handled by the
supervisor of circulation receivables, all substantial
supervisory authority rests with the administrative
assistant in this department who already is ex-
cluded from the unit. We do not view the responsi-
bilities concerning time off and vacations to be
anything more than the exercise of a routine func-
tion, which consists of following the company
policy of permitting an employee time off on vaca-
tion if there are no conflicts with other employ-
ees. 65 In view of these facts we decline to exclude
this position from the unit.
Within the accounting department is a unit
which is responsible for the collection of advertis-
ing accounts. There are two excluded heads of the
advertising collection accounts: the assistant con-
troller and credit manager, Pierce, and the adminis-
trative assistant, Powers. The administrative assis-
tant for credit and collection is the immediate supe-
rior of the regular accounts and the transient ac-
counts. The regular accounts section is responsible
for the collection of approximately 800 classified
monthly advertising accounts. This unit includes
Tom Martin, the credit supervisor for regular ac-
counts, and six full-time clerks. Transient accounts,
which also includes a credit supervisor, Dorothy
Salke, as well as three to four full-time and three
part-time clerks,6 6 is responsible for the so-called
classified transient accounts. The parties agree and
65 See, e.g., Tucson Gas d Electric Company, 241 NLRB 181 (1'979).
86 Three of whom work during the evening.
the record indicates that the authority and duties of
the credit supervisors for both regular and transient
accounts are essentially the same. However, the
parties differ as to whether these facts demonstrate
that either is a supervisor or managerial employee
within the meaning of the Act.
Like many of the other designated "supervisors"
in the accounting department, both credit supervi-
sors interview prospective accounting clerks and
make recommendations to the administrative assis-
tant, in this case the one for credit and collection.
Further, in the small units, Martin and Salke make
out schedules and assignments, grant time off,
assign overtime, and make recommendations for
merit increases or promotions. However, there are
few employees in these sections, and they have
particular job responsibilities which they perform
each day. Thus, the assigning and scheduling of
work does not usually require the use of indepen-
dent judgment. As noted above, granting vacation
or time off is similarly circumscribed in discretion
by the Employer's policy in this area. Finally, the
record indicates that on a transfer and promotion,
the credit manager independently interviewed the
person and made the promotion. Moreover, several
recommendations for merit increases have not been
acted on. As to their daily work, both credit super-
visors make arrangements for liquidation of delin-
quent accounts for balances up to $300. This duty
is performed pursuant to Employer guidelines, al-
though on occasion credit may be extended beyond
these guidelines. In these matters, both credit su-
pervisors deal individually with advertisers in ar-
ranging for collection or liquidation of the delin-
quent balances. Because of their close relationship
with advertisers in these areas, the credit supervi-
sors have made suggestions and proposals for
changes in the manner in which accounts are col-
lected or liquidated.
Contrary to the Employer, we find that the
credit supervisors of regular accounts and transient
accounts are statutory employees and not supervi-
sory or managerial employees. As found above
with respect to other alleged supervisors in this de-
partment, we note that all decisions which affect
the employment relationship with the clerks-in
this case only 10 full-time and 3 part-time employ-
ees-must be made by personnel such as the admin-
istrative assistant of the unit or the assistant comp-
troller, who reviews all relevant facts involved in
the decision. The other duties of the supervisors
are demonstrably routine or pro forma. With re-
spect to the Employer's argument concerning the
managerial status of these credit supervisors, it is
apparent that the credit supervisors follow the
guidelines set down by the Employer in liquidating
194
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
accounts or collecting advertising accounts. Clerks
in the department have authority similar to that of
the credit supervisors. Moreover, we note that
there is an administrative assistant for credit and
collection and an assistant controller and credit
manager, both of whom are active in the manage-
ment of the Employer's credit policy. The fact that
the credit supervisors may on occasion grant exten-
sion of credit beyond the $3,000 guideline given to
them does not show these employees have the type
of authority the Board has deemed to be manageri-
al. 67 We thus decline to exclude these employees
from the unit.
The Employer's cashier department handles pay-
ments and deals with the banks with which the
Employer has a relationship. There is an excluded
administrative assistant over this unit, Jack Pierce.
In addition to the administrative assistant, there are
an assistant cashier, four full-time clerks, and occa-
sional part-timers. The Employer asserts that
Hanzel Zender, who has held the assistant cashier
position since 1954, is a supervisor.
At the cashier's cage, cashiers receive payments
from individuals as well as payments through the
mail. Employees working at the cashier area sepa-
rate and arrange the payments, pay out petty cash
as required, and make bank deposits. The assistant
cashier is in charge of dealing with the banks and
maintaining the accounts of the Employer at these
institutions. Over the 25-year period she has served
as the assistant cashier, Zender has helped initiate
changes in the procedures in which the Employer
deals with the banks. When there are discrepencies
between deposits as maintained by the Employer
and as counted by the bank, the assistant cashier
negotiates with the banks to resolve their differ-
ences. The assistant cashier spends a majority of
her workday performing functions related to these
banking duties. The assistant cashier also has rec-
ommended the hire or transfer of various employ-
"' The Employer here, as elsewhere, relies on, inter alia, Eastern
Camera and Photo Corp., 140 NLRB 569 (1963), to support its assertion
that employees like the credit supervisors are managerial employees.
However, the facts of that case are different from those at hand. In ast-
ern Camera, the audiovisual employees found to be managerial employees
were the only employees in that department. They sold audio and visual
equipment to industries and schools, and such work required that the)
contact outside customers to determine needs, formulate bids on orders.
and submit bids on behalf of the employer Further, they regularly or-
dered equipment directly from manufacturers, thereby committing em-
ployer credit. The Board there found that employees with "broad author-
ity" to pledge employer credit are managerial. Such is clearly not the
case with respect to the credit supervisors here, who do not possess such
"broad authority" in using limited discretion to exceed the 3.000 guide-
line set up by the Employer for adjusting delinquent accounts. Nor are
they the only employees in the department, there being also the adminis-
trative assistant for credit and collection as well as the assistant controller
and credit manager. Indeed, in this respect we note that in Eastern,
Camera itself, the Board found that the camera repair department em-
ployees, who could pledge employer credit but were restricted and limit-
ed by employer guidelines, were, in fact, not managerial employees.
ees for the cashier units, although turnover has
been low. However, recent hires have not been in-
terviewed by the assistant cashier, but hired by the
administrative assistant. When this hiring took
place, Zender was ill. The schedules are prepared
by the assistant cashier, who also makes assign-
ments within the departments, and schedules vaca-
tions and time off. However, in this regard, it is
noted that most of the employees in the cashier
unit have specified areas in which they work and
have been long-term employees with the Employ-
er, and thus there is little discretion or independent
judgment involved in making assignments or sched-
ules.
We conclude, contrary to the Employer, that the
assistant cashier is not a supervisor. The supervi-
sion given by the assistant cashier to the four full-
time employees in the unit is clearly routine, as dis-
cussed above with respect to other alleged supervi-
sors here. The assistant cashier spends most of her
time performing work relating to the banks. This
unit, although it includes only five employees, is
headed by an administrative assistant who clearly is
involved in hiring and other personnel decisions in
the department. We thus decline to ascribe supervi-
sory status to the assistant cashier and we shall in-
clude this position in the unit.
The accounts payable supervisor position was
created in 1973. The accounts payable supervisor,
whom the Employer asserts is a supervisory, man-
agerial, and confidential employee, is accountable
to Administrative Assistant Terry Wiseman. The
accounts payable division is responsible for pro-
cessing bills and invoices for payments. The depart-
ment also processes requisitions and vouchers.
Moreover, the accounts payable supervisor is re-
sponsible for payments pursuant to contracts which
the Company has entered into. Recently, the ac-
counts payable system has been automated. The ac-
counts payable supervisor has been involved in the
planning and systems operations aspect of this ac-
counts payable system as well as in coding materi-
als for the automated method.
There are one temporary and three regular
clerks who work with the accounts payable super-
visor in this unit. As with other supervisors in the
accounting department, the accounts payable su-
pervisor, Mary Brown, can make recommendations
on hiring, reprimand, and discharge and is initially
responsible for scheduling and assigning employees.
Brown also can approve price discrepencies up to
10 percent of the value of a contract to a maximum
of $50; the accounts payable supervisor can also
allow discrepancies on a bill to a value of $30. In
reviewing the payments made by the accounts pay-
195
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
able department, the accounts payable supervisor
reviews all the Employer's accounts.
Based on the foregoing and the record as a
whole, we cannot agree with the Employer that
the accounts payable supervisor is a supervisory,
managerial, or confidential employee. The supervi-
sory status of this employee is no greater than that
of any of the other alleged supervisory accountants
in this department, whom we have determined to
be statutory employees. In effect, all their recom-
mendations are subject to independent review by
administrative assistants who are excluded from the
unit. Nor do we find the fact that the accounts
payable supervisor can approve price discrepancies
probative of the managerial status of the accounts
payable supervisor. These decisions are clearly
within the Employer's guidelines. The Employer's
argument that Brown's participation in automating
the accounts payable system shows managerial
status is not persuasive. The decision to automate
the system was clearly made by high level Post
personnel and the fact that Brown may have made
recommendations concerning the efficient use and
implementation of the system does not render her a
managerial employee. Finally, the mere fact that
Brown may have access to all the Employer's ac-
counts does not make her a confidential employee.
The Board has long held that mere access to such
information does not establish confidential status.68
The Employer attempts to bolster its argument in
this regard by maintaining that Brown has access
to accounts of the Post's labor counsel, which may
list services performed by labor counsel. The ten-
uousness of this argument is reflected in the fact
that the Employer claims only that "such informa-
tion could be highly confidential in certain in-
stances," and maintains that "detailed descriptions
of management labor counsel services could be
very detrimental to the Company if known to bar-
gaining unit employee." There is no documentary
evidence to show that the accounts are listed in the
manner claimed; in any event, they are not of the
nature of such confidential information as to render
the position handling such items to be confiden-
tial. 69 The Post argues that Brown's participation
in the department's automation program, which
could lead to decisions as the size of the labor
force to be used, requires finding of confidential
status here. However, the mere fact that Brown
participated in the computerization program does
6s See, e.g., Planned Parenthood Association of Miami Valley. Inc., 217
NLRB 1098 (1975); Ohio State Legal Services Association, 239 NLRB 594
(1978).
69 See Ernst & Ernst National Warehouse, 228 NLRB 590 (1977) (the
Board looks not to the confidentiality of the information, but to the con-
fidentiality of the relationship between the employee and persons who ex-
ercise "managerial" functions in the field of labor relations).
not make her a confidential employee even though
she might have access to information regarding
personnel changes. Such decisions are made by
higher management; moreover, this aspect of her
job will end when the computerization is complet-
ed. Therefore, it has not been demonstrated that
Brown is an employee who will confidentially
assist persons who determine labor relations policy.
Also under the receivables administrative assis-
tant is the paper marker department. In addition to
the paper marker supervisor, Oliver Wendell
Holmes, whom the Employer claims is a supervi-
sor, there are six full-time and five to seven part-
time employees in this division. The paper marker
supervisor works 10 p.m. to 5:30 a.m., Monday
through Friday; most employees in the division
also work this schedule. However, there are em-
ployees who work on the weekend when the paper
marker supervisor is not present. The paper marker
department examines classified ads to (1) determine
lineage of new starts, (2) advise the composing
room of expired advertisement, and (3) report dis-
crepancies to the classified department for neces-
sary adjustments. Holmes testified that he spends
approximately 70 percent of his worktime perform-
ing unit work and approximately 30 percent of the
time performing "supervisory duties." These duties
include: assigning employees, although the record
shows that most employees have specific classifica-
tions of advertisement for which they are responsi-
ble; scheduling employees' hours, vacations, and
time off; interviewing employees and making rec-
ommendations on hire to the administrative assis-
tant; making recommendations on discharge; and
evaluating probationary employees.
While the issue of the status of the paper marker
supervisor is somewhat close, based on this record,
we decline to find the paper marker supervisor to
be a statutory supervisor. The Board has found
that leadmen who on occasion make recommenda-
tions and perform lower level supervisory actions
such as scheduling and allowing vacation and time
off are not supervisors when significant supervisory
authority is vested in higher personnel and deci-
sions are, and must have been, reviewed by these
management employees. 70 Thus, we conclude that
longtime employee Holmes, who had been paper
marker supervisor for 14 years prior to the hearing,
is not a supervisor within the meaning of Section
2(11) of the Act.
The budget section of the Employer prepares
annual and long range forecasts and budgets for the
Company. The budget section is headed by an ad-
ministrative assistant, and is staffed by a senior
70 See, e.g., Plastic Industrial Products. Inc., 139 NLRB 1066 (1962).
196
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
budget analyst, Richard Nichols, alleged to be a su-
pervisor and confidential employee, and three
clerks. In compiling the data for the annual and
long range-2-1/2 and 5 years-forecasts, the em-
ployees within the budget section have access to
almost all of the Company's records. 7 ' In prepar-
ing these budgets and forecasts, duties are divided
among staff members. Thus, two clerks are respon-
sible for the news and production budget, respec-
tively. The senior budget analyst is responsible for
administrative and executive preparations. It is un-
disputed that the senior budget analyst is involved
in costing out the payroll for future wage pack-
ages. Thus, information relating to probable in-
creases under the collective-bargaining agreement
are forwarded from the labor relations section of
the Employer's operation to the budget section for
inclusion in these estimates. In addition to these
duties, the senior budget analyst substitutes for the
administrative assistant during the latter's absence
from the department.
Contrary to the Employer, we do not find that
the record supports the contention that the senior
budget analyst is a supervisor or a confidential em-
ployee. The sole factor relied on by the Employer
in support of its supervisory contention is the sub-
stitution of the senior budget analyst for the admin-
istrative assistant when the latter is not present in
the department. However, the record indicates that
this substitution is not frequent, and that the senior
budget analyst exercises no more authority in that
role than he does normally while acting as the
senior analyst in the department. With respect to
the confidential employee claim, the facts indicate
that the senior budget analyst, like other employees
in the department, primarily compiles data and has
access to information in compiling such data in pre-
paring the annual budget and long range forecast.
The Board has long held that mere access to infor-
mation and mere compiling of information without
more does not convert a rank-and-file employee to
some enjoying a confidential status. 7 2 Nor are we
persuaded in this case that the relationship between
the senior budget analyst and the labor relations
department of the Employer requires a finding of
the senior budget analyst's confidential status. The
record shows only that, at most, the budget depart-
ment receives probable increases which may result
from negotiations, and estimates from current col-
lective-bargaining agreements which must be com-
puted to prepare the annual budget and the long
range forecast for the Employer. Much of this in-
71 However, they do not have access to the records concerning the
payroll of the Employer's executives.
72 See, e.g., Pullman Standard, supra, fn. 60; N. LR.. v. Union Ji
Company, 607 F.2d 852 (9th Cir. 1979).
formation, as the Union notes, is available in the
public record; i.e., through the collective-bargain-
ing agreement or through the annual reports of the
Employer. Further, the Board has held in cases
such as Pullman Inc., supra, and C&I, supra, that
more than just access to or dealings with the labor
relations aspects of an employer's operations are re-
quired to substantiate a confidential employee find-
ing. In these cases, the Board has required that the
parties seeking to establish the confidential status of
an employee show that an employee has access to
precise labor rates which the employer is willing to
agree to. In this case, the senior budget analyst re-
ceives only projections and possibilities forwarded
from the labor relations section of the Company
for calculation purposes only. 73 It is interesting to
note that while the Employer claims that a conflict
of interest would exist because of the senior budget
analyst's access to such information, the only exam-
ple on the record, despite the long history of inclu-
sion of the senior budget analyst in the unit, is a
recent instance of an alleged contact by a union-re-
lated person who allegedly approached an adminis-
trative clerk and requested advance wage informa-
tion. The Post does not claim that any of the clerks
in this department are confidential.7 4 The senior
budget analyst was not approached, nor, in fact,
was such information divulged. We therefore con-
clude that the senior budget analyst is neither a
confidential employee nor a supervisory employee
who should be excluded from the unit.
The operating statements clerk alleged to be a
confidential employee is responsible for the input
of journal vouchers to the data processing depart-
ment and for balancing outputs. Essentially, the op-
erating statements clerk, who is supervised by the
administrative assistant for general ledger and oper-
ating reports, is responsible for closing the books of
the Employer. In performing this function, the op-
erating statements clerk, Carter, prepares profit and
loss statements, balance sheets, and expense and
supplies figures. The operating statements clerk has
access to Employer information, including, among
other things, the regular payroll register, the cor-
porate executive payroll, and expense accounts.
The Employer asserts that because of the sensi-
tive nature of the information to which the operat-
ing statements clerk has access, the Board should
exclude this position from the unit as one essential-
ly confidential in nature. The Employer specifically
requests the Board reexamine its doctrine of includ-
'a See, eg., Loma Prieta Regional Center. Inc., 241 NLRB 1071 (1979).
74 Although the Post claims that it is currently evaluating the status of
these individuals to determine their confidential nature, we note that, al-
though the Employer had prepared this case for over 2 years, it never-
theless made no claim that these employees were confidential.
197
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing employees who have access to payroll informa-
tion of unit employees. 7 5 However, we believe that
the Board law in this area is correct and we de-
cline the Employer's request. Moreover, we note
that documentation for the Employer's argument is
lacking. Thus, the Employer's claim of "sensitive
material" centers on the allegation that the operat-
ing statements clerk could monitor management-
labor policy by keeping track of the pattern of top
executives through evaluation of their expense ac-
counts. Certainly, such a remote possibility cannot
be used to exclude an employee who otherwise
performs work which historically has been recog-
nized as unit work. As it is clear that the operating
statements clerk is not an employee who is in-
volved with a person who formulates, determines,
and effectuates management policy in the field of
labor relations, we do not find the operating state-
ments clerk to be a confidential employee, and thus
we refuse to exclude the operating statements clerk
from the unit.
The payroll department of the Employer is re-
sponsible for issuing checks for the Company. It is
administered by the administrative assistant for
payroll and includes a payroll supervisor, whom
the Employer argues is a supervisor or confidential
employee, and several clerks. As in other areas in
the accounting department, the payroll supervisor
performs initial interviews and documents initial
problems with respect to such matters as discipline,
but all problems are referred to the administrative
assistant, who is outside the unit and who is re-
sponsible for this section. The record also indicates
that on occasion the payroll supervisor is consulted
by or consults with the vice president for labor re-
lations, Wallace, concerning interpretations of pay-
roll matters derived or emanating from the Post's
collective-bargaining agreements.
The record fails to demonstrate that the payroll
supervisor is a supervisor within the meaning of
the Act. All alleged relevant supervisory actions
taken by the payroll supervisors are reviewed by
the administrative assistant in charge of the payroll
department. Nor is the payroll supervisor a confi-
dential employee. As discussed above, the Board
has uniformly held that mere access to information
such as payroll information is insufficient to confer
confidential status on an employee.7 6 We thus de-
cline to exclude this position from the unit.
H. Data Processing Department
The data processing department provides the
Employer with systems analysis and programing in
the development of data processing, operates the
75 See, e.g., Dinkler-St. Charles Hotel. Inc., 124 NLRB 1302 (1959).
76 See Dinkler-St. Charles, supra: Pullman, supra.
data processing equipment, and provides support
maintenance and modification of the Company's
existing data processing system. The department is
headed by a director, who is excluded from the
unit. There are also assistant directors for cold-type
conversion, publishing systems, business, cost and
schedule systems, and systems programing. 7 7 No
employees work for the assistant director for cold-
type conversion. Working under the other three as-
sistant directors are six managers for various sys-
tems and subsystems. The Employer claims that
four of the managers-those for computer oper-
ations; production subsystem; business systems and
programing; ad cost and schedule systems-are su-
pervisors or managerial employees. 78 There are ap-
proximately 40 staff personnel under the various
systems managers. 79
The manager of computer operations, James
Yannon, 8 ° heads the actual operations of the data
processing system. There are 22 employees work-
ing in this area, including keypunch and data con-
trol clerks and computer operators. These employ-
ees do the manual work pursuant to user requests.
As manager, Yannon has interviewed and hired
several employees. Other managers have inter-
viewed applicants and made recommendations to
the director or assistant directors. In addition,
Yannon had been involved in disciplining employ-
ees, having issued two written reprimands. There
was also testimony by Yannon and Abbott, former
manager and current assistant director, that manag-
ers assign work to employees and determine staff-
ing for projects. Managers also prepare evaluations
of probationary employees. Unsatisfactory evalua-
tion may lead to discharge.
77 During the course of the hearing, the data processing department
was increased from two assistant directors to four assistant directors. Al-
though the Employer asserts that the assistant directors have been histori-
cally excluded from the unit, and that the record was not developed on
their status, the Union contends they are unit employees. We agree with
the Employer that the status of the assistant directors is not before us in
this case. Witnesses who testified concerning positions on the data pro-
cessing department were questioned about the assistant directors in addi-
tion to the managers whom the Employer claimed were at issue. The tes-
timony concerning the assistant directors, including that elicited by coun-
sel for the Union, appears to have been intended to clarify the assistant
directors' duties in comparison to those of the managers. The Employer
correctly notes that the status of the assistant directors was never fully
contested at the hearing. This position contrasts with other positions,
such as the systems research consultants discussed below, which the Em-
ployer asserted had always been excluded and which should not he con-
sidered new, but for which the Employer permitted and assisted in pre-
senting record evidence to resolve the status because of the special nature
of the proceeding.
;7 The Employer states that two managers are ITU personnel and thus
not at issue here. The Union does not contest this fact.
79 As indicated above, the data processing department employs a mix-
ture of union-represenited and ITUI-represented employees.
HO This manager position was the only one filled at the time of the
hearing. In addition to Yannon, the former manager of business systems
and programing, Abbott, and Director Crocker testified about the re-
sponsibilities of managers.
198
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
Based on the foregoing, it is clear that the man-
agers in the data processing department possess and
exercise many of the supervisory responsibilities
contemplated by Section 2(11) of the Act, and
therefore are excluded from the unit.
1. Advance Systems Research Department
In November 1976, the Washington Post Compa-
ny created the advance systems research depart-
ment. 81 A similar if smaller advance planning divi-
sion had been contained in the data processing de-
partment, but the instant department was devel-
oped to consider planning projects for the Employ-
er. In charge of this department is the director of
advance systems and assistant to the president,
Donald Rice. There are also four planning project
managers whose exclusion is not in dispute. In ad-
dition to these managers, there is a manager of sys-
tems research, Sol Broder, who is excluded from
the unit. Working under this manager are two re-
search consultants, William Churchill and Freder-
ick Mickert, whom the Employer asserts are man-
agerial or confidential employees.
The consultants are involved in the long-term
planning projects for the Company. Essentially,
they are to identify, define, formulate, and evaluate
systems projects for the Employer. For example,
the consultants investigated and reported on the
four systems projects initially selected by the Com-
pany's president.8 2 These projects involved techno-
logical change, automation, and improved informa-
tion processing. In performing these tasks, the con-
sultants spoke with department managers and other
personnel in areas related to the project topics in
order to prepare a report and framework for fur-
ther work in those areas. After the implementation
of the projects, the consultants worked with the
project group to study their progress and provide
technical assistance.
We agree with the Employer that the two re-
search consultants should be excluded from the
unit as managerial employees. The record indicates
that they clearly are part of a department which is
involved in special projects and planning which
will affect jobs and utilization of equipment and
other facilities for the Employer's operation. Al-
though they do not lead the projects which were
approved for implementation by the Employer,
they studied and made recommendations which
8' The Employer avers that the Employer's parent company, not the
Employer itself, formed this department to assist the parent company in
developing major projects for the Employer and other corporate proper-
ties. However, the Company does not dispute that it hired the personnel
in this department, and the record reflects only the work performed by
these personnel for the Employer.
82 These projects included sales information, cold-type conversion.
cost control, and ad production.
were used by the project leaders, and they contin-
ued studying the project during their implementa-
tion. In developing and improving policies and pro-
cedures which impact on the Employer's business,
especially its use of technology and personnel, the
research assistants meet the standard of managerial
employees and are therefore excluded from the
unit. 3
III. THE NEWSROOM 8 4
The news section of the Washington Post is
headed by a group consisting of the publisher, the
president, the executive editor, the managing
editor, and the deputy managing editor. Below
these management personnel are assistant managing
editors (AMEs) who are in charge of the various
departments within the Employer's newsroom
structure. It is undisputed that the AMEs are su-
pervisors or managerial employees, and, that they
have never been included in the bargaining unit
represented by the Guild.
A general comment about the Employer's news
operations seems warranted here. The record estab-
lishes that, prior to the hire of most reporters, the
executive editor or managing editor (and some-
times both) make the final decision whether the
Company should hire the individual under consid-
eration. Indeed, the record is replete with instances
where the executive and managing editors initiated
the hiring process themselves. This method of
hiring is not surprising, since the Employer consid-
ers its reporters to be its "most precious commod-
ity." The significance of this fact will manifest
itself in the discussion below.
A. National Desk
This department is responsible for the reporting
of national news. The national desk is headed by an
AME. The Post contends that six other editors in
this department-national editor, deputy national
editor, three national assistant editors, and night na-
tional editor-should be excluded as either supervi-
sors or managerial employees, or both. The nation-
al desk staff includes, in addition to these six edi-
83 See CF d I Steel Corporation 196 NLRB 470, 472 (1972).
84 The positions which the Employer seeks to exclude were filled by
various persons during the course of the hearing. Reference to named in-
dividuals is, for the most part, for identification purposes only. The
record shows, and we recognize, that changes in personnel in positions
involved here were, and are. frequent. For example, the national desk un-
derwent several changes in personnel during the course of the hearing. In
most instances, such changes did not result in different functions or meth-
ods of operation, and, thus, the discussion of the duties of a particular
incumbent is generally applicable to the position at all times. In addition,
we note that the disputed position of managing or deputy editor for The
Washington Post Magazine was vacant and its duties revised at the time
of hearing. Consequently, we shall not make any determination with re-
spect to the alleged supervisory status of such position.
199
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tors, approximately 33 reporters, 6 full-time and 6
to 12 part-time copy editors, 7 aides and secretar-
ies, and a number of "stringers." There are national
desk bureaus in New York, Los Angeles, and
Houston. Many of the reporters based in Washing-
ton, D.C., have "beat" assignments; i.e., well-de-
fined areas which a reporter covers on a continu-
ing basis. Other reporters are on general assign-
ment.
The record reveals that the AME for the nation-
al desk is involved in most major decisions on
hiring, discharge, budgets, and beat assignments.
Reporters on the desk work closely with their edi-
tors, either developing ideas in conjunction with
the editor or, in many instances, informing an
editor of the work being done and developing sto-
ries on their own.8 5 These reporters work under
various editors, as discussed below.
The national editor regularly substitutes for the
AME during the latter's vacations and absences.
The national editor is involved with the AME in
the day-to-day running of the the national desk.
Together with the AME, the national editor makes
decisions regarding changes in beat assignments.
These two also conduct conferences with reporters
when there is concern about a reporter's progress
with the Employer. Budgetary matters are also
within the domain of the national editor; in con-
junction with the AME, the national editor plans
the annual budget. This planning involves making
decisions on allocations for new employees, merit
increases, and stringers.
In addition to these duties, the incumbent nation-
al editor at the time of the hearing, as well as his
predecessor, presided over a group of reporters.
Further, it appears that the national editor assists in
the selection of national assistant editors and there
is undisputed evidence that a national editor has
hired a researcher for the national desk.
It is evident from this record that the national
editor shares with the AME major responsibility
for the direction of the national desk. We do not
disagree with the Guild's assertions that the AME
exercises extensive control over the department,
's The Guild alleges, and the Employer denies, that the Washington
Post is a "reporter's paper" rather than an "editor's paper." This issue
arose several times during the hearing and in the briefs, concerning var-
ious news departments, including the one under discussion here. The dif-
ference between the two can be described as follows: a "reporter's
paper" is one in which the reporters have a major responsibility for de-
veloping topics, covering and writing about these topics, and devising an
approach regarding the story; an "editor's paper" is one in which the
major role in making such decisions is assumed by editors. For purposes
of the instant Decision, we find it unnecessary to decide which category
best describes this Employer since, in any event, it is the actual duties of
each individual and the position each occupies that is relevant in deter-
mining his status. Of course, whether or not reporters assume the burden
in developing stories will be probative in determining the working rela-
tionship between reporters and editors.
and that the AME is consulted or consults with
editors on almost all major decisions. We also note
that the national editor, like other editors discussed
below, reads reporters' copy. Nor have we over-
looked the fact that the AME, as well as the man-
aging and executive editors, decides matters with-
out consulting other editors. Nonetheless, as the
facts discussed above disclose, the national editor
effectively exercises supervisory authority in daily
administrative and personnel matters within the de-
partment. Accordingly, we shall exclude the na-
tional editor from the unit.8 6
Deputy National Editor Fox, who was a national
assistant editor before assuming the deputy slot just
prior to the close of the hearing, handles many of
the administrative tasks on the national desk. Fox is
responsible for promulgating the day schedule-
both for the week and weekend-for the depart-
ment. While it appears that most reporters, and es-
pecially beat reporters, cover events as necessary,
they otherwise work regular hours. Fox sets sched-
ules for reporters and editors for holidays and
nights. Fox also administers the vacation system,
and has authority to grant up to 2 weeks time off
for reporters. Among other duties, he prepares the
"futures book," a list of events across the nation
which may be covered. He is also in charge of a
small coterie of reporters.
In view of the above, we conclude that the
deputy national editor should be excluded from the
unit. The largely undisputed evidence concerning
various tasks of the incumbent qualifies him as a su-
pervisor under the Act. Thus, while the deputy's
authority with respect to reporters generally may
be circumscribed by the AME, as alleged by the
Guild, the factors detailed above and contained in
the record as a whole, particularly his authority to
schedule and to grant time off, lead us to conclude
that the deputy national editor should be excluded
from the unit.
Copy editors (also referred to as assistant nation-
al editors) read a reporter's story for accuracy and
grammatical structure, and write headlines. Copy
editors "sit on the rim" of the copy desk, i.e., they
sit around a desk, and the night national editor or
"slot man," i.e., the person in the middle, passes
out work to them.8 7
Former Night Editor Crenshaw testified that as
night editor he began work at 3 p.m. and stayed
until work was completed, usually 11:30 p.m. On
an average day, there are usually four copy editors
working Monday through Saturday, and three on
8 See Bulletin Company, 226 NLRB 345, 349 (1976).
"' The phrases "slot man" and "rim men" were used by both parties to
describe the positions of night national editor and copy editors respec-
tively.
200
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
Sunday. Their starting times are staggered between
3 and 6 p.m. Overtime is worked as required to get
out copy. The night editor prepares the copy edi-
tors' schedules which are based on staff prefer-
ences. Any conflicts are resolved by seniority. Va-
cations and times off are handled in the same
manner.
The night editor distributes copy to the copy
editors as it arrives at the copy desk. If a copy
editor, in reviewing a reporter's copy,8 8 has prob-
lems with a story, he may refer it to a day-side
editor or the reporter. The night editor reviews the
work of the copy editor before the copy is sent to
be printed. Since the night editor is generally the
only editor present on the national desk after 8
p.m., he may call reporters or the AME regarding
a news event.
Although there is some conflict in the testimony
concerning the night editor's role in hiring and dis-
cipline, Richard Harwood, a former AME of this
department, indicated that the night editor inter-
viewed and approved the employment of copy edi-
tors. In its brief, the Post contends that the night
editor "is responsible" for hiring copy editors. 89
Crenshaw, a former night editor, stated that he did
not interview applicants for these positions, but ad-
mitted to giving applicants tryouts and to making
recommendations to the AME. 9 0 On occasion, the
AME-national or AME in charge of personnel has
interviewed prospective copy editors. The compos-
ite of this mosaic of testimony indicates that the
night national editor does make recommendations
to superiors who must make the ultimate decision
on whether to hire a copy editor. Crenshaw stated
that of three recommendations to hire that he had
made, two were accepted, and no negatively evalu-
ated copy editor was hired. Crenshaw further testi-
fied without contradiction that a copy editor has
been transferred into the department without prior
consultation with the night editor.
With respect to discipline, it is undisputed that
the night editor reviews the work of the copy edi-
tors before it leaves the copy desk, and may return
it to the copy editor if he does not consider it suit-
able for publication. Further, the AME has in-
structed the night editor to "keep book" on the
copy editors; in other words, if a problem devel-
ops, the night editor has been authorized to moni-
tor the situation. However, the record does not in-
dicate that a "book" has ever been kept on a copy
editor by the night editor.
s8 This review process occurs after editing by the editor of the report-
V.
89 Harwood testified, "People are brought in for try outs, and on the
basis of [the night editor's] recommendation, [the copy editors] are either
hired or not hired."
'0 Crenshaw himself was hired as a copy editor by an AME.
Based on all of the above, we conclude that the
night editor is not a supervisor under the Act.
While the night editor does make recommendations
concerning copy editors, these appear to be more
akin to the judgments that a leadman would pass
on the product of a lesser skilled worker. As indi-
cated previously, the record reveals that the AME
does receive recommendations from the night
editor concerning the hiring of prospective copy
editors but the record also reveals that the AME
makes the final decision on hire. Similarly, while
there have been no instances of discipline on the
copy desk, it appears that the night editor, upon in-
struction by the AME, is the conduit for keeping
track of possible poor performance. The review of
copy editor's work by the night editor does not
prove supervisory authority, nor does the routine
assignment of work by the night editor to the copy
editors.9"' Since the night editor's authorty to
evaluate copy editors is circumscribed and the
overall performance of his tasks does not require
independent judgment or use of discretion we shall
not exclude the night national editor.
The remaining positions in controversy on the
national desk are the three assistant national edi-
tors. As indicated previously, the Employer main-
tains bureaus in three cities. It also has contacts
with over 150 stringers throughout the country.
One national assistant editor presides over the out-
of-town posts. The incumbent at the time of the
hearing, Joe Garreau, was involved in the estab-
lishment of the Houston bureau. Garreau wrote a
proposal on the matter at the request of the AME,
who had consulted previously with the executive
and managing editors. Both the national editor and
Garreau recommended opening a Houston bureau.
The AME also consults Garreau on budgetary
matters concerning stringers and free lancers, as
well as the bureaus. As an assignment editor, Gar-
reau may direct general assignment reporters to
stories or tell a beat reporter to undertake another
task within the beat.
The Post claims that this national assistant editor
position should be excluded from the unit because
it is both managerial and supervisory. We cannot
agree. The managerial assertion rests on this edi-
tor's alleged degree of control over and his recom-
mendations concerning bureaus, and his prepara-
tion of budgets for stories to be purchased from
stringers. However, the recommendation concern-
ing the opening of the Houston bureau was done at
management's behest, and the directive filtered
down through at least two superior levels, includ-
91 The Peoria Journal Star. Inc., 117 NLRB 708. 709-710 (1957); Subur-
ban Newspaper Publications. Inc., 226 NLRB 154, 157 (1976); compare
Bulletin Company, supra, 226 NLRB at 354.
201
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing the executive and managing editors. Garreau's
control over the bureaus as detailed in this record
does not reflect managerial authority.
Thus, while the Employer contends that Gar-
reau's participation in budget planning is manageri-
al, testimony by a former AME for the national
desk reveals that the AME and the national editor
are primarily involved in determining the budget,
and only "in a minor way" would Garreau partici-
pate in budgetary discussions for purchase of
stringer articles, and bureau expenses. There is no
direct evidence that Garreau prepares the budget,
nor that he is directly responsible for the bureau's
expenditures. Nor does Garreau's relationship with
stringer and free lancers reveal managerial status.
The Board has determined an employee's status as
managerial on the basis of "whether the employee
participated in the formulation, determination or ef-
fectuation of policy with respect to employee rela-
tions matters or whether there exists other inconsis-
tencies or conflicts of interest."9 2 The relationship
between Garreau and stringers, i.e., his selection of
them from a group and their payment from within
an apparently limited amount of funds, does not es-
tablish a conflict between this editor and employees
that requires a finding that Garreau is a managerial
employee. 9 3
Further, contrary to the Employer's assertions,
the record does not establish that national assistant
editor Garreau's duties are supervisory within the
meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act. The record
does not show that a national assistant editor actu-
ally hires reporters, and, while Garreau may have
recommended various reporters be hired, the
record shows that most of these recommendations
were made for positions in other departments. Gar-
reau's recommendations in these instances appear
to be personal ones, and former AME Harwood
testified that many prospective reporters are initial-
ly considered by the Post because of recommenda-
tions by current employees.9 4 Finally, the direction
given by the national assistant editor to the bureau
reporters appears to be more attenuated than
argued by the Post. Thus, many stories are self-
generating, and reporters work independent of desk
control in many instances. In sum, the relationship
between this editor and the reporters appears to be
a2 Boston After Dark. Inc., 210 NLRB 38, 41 (1974).
'a See Boston After Dark. supra at 41-42.
94 Harwood stated that the hiring process for reporters commenced in
one of four ways: (I) the "old boy network," i.e., referrals from other
reporters or friends in the industry, as with Garreau's recommendations
here; (2) established reputation, where the Post actively seeks a "known
reporter"; (3) transfers; and (4) formal. "over-the-transom" applications.
cooperative and informal, although certain lines of
authority do exist.9 5
Another national assistant editor performs
"swing" work and special projects. At the time of
the hearing, former Night Editor Crenshaw had
been transferred to this position. The "swing"
editor does a variety of tasks: he fills in on the
bureau desk I day a week, he replaces the night
editor, and he works as project editor, reviewing
long stories for Sunday's paper. In addition, he fills
in for the national editor on weekends. This swing
editor does not control a regular group of report-
ers, as do other editors in the national department,
although there are usually two reporters on duty
during the weekend.
The Employer contends that because the swing
editor replaces the national editor, a national assis-
tant editor, and the night editor, the position
should be excluded from the unit. However, we
have decided that the night editor and the national
assistant editor's position occupied by Garreau
should not be excluded, and the Employer does not
contend, nor does the record show, that the 1-day
job as projects editor, in which the editor moves
copy, establishes a basis for statutory exclusion.
There remains for consideration the swing edi-
tor's substitution for the national editor on week-
ends. As the Employer concedes, the swing editor
and AME divide management of the national desk
on weekends. Moreover, there are only two report-
ers on Saturday and one on Sunday available for
assignments. Of greater significance, almost all
weekend assignments have been made in advance.
Crenshaw testified that if a story breaks on a par-
ticular beat, the swing editor calls the reporter re-
sponsible for that beat. These facts, without more,
do not establish that the swing editor should be
classified as a supervisor. The weekend substitution
for a supervisor, while somewhat probative on its
face of the status of the editor, cannot obscure the
actual facts relating to his activities during such
substitution. The AME or national editor rotate re-
sponsibility for the department on weekends. More-
over, staffing is small and is prearranged in terms
of most assignments. Thus, there is little room for
independent judgment or discretion. Accordingly,
we conclude that this national assistant editor
should not be excluded from the unit.9 6
9s Garreau's relationship to reporters may be somewhat similar to that
of the national and deputy national editors but the exclusions of the latter
are based on supervisory functions other than editorial functions.
9s The Employer seeks to exclude a third national assistant editor posi-
tion, which was vacant at the close of the hearing. Since this contention
is based on the Employer's arguments concerning the other national assis-
tant editors, who have not been excluded, and, as the record does not
demonstrate to the contrary, we will not exclude this position as supervi-
sory or managerial.
202
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
B. Metro Desk
The metro department is responsible for cover-
ing Washington, D.C., its suburbs, and Maryland
and Virginia. It includes four main sections: Dis-
trict, Maryland, Virginia, and Weekly. Heading
this section is the AME-metro. Beneath the AME
is the assistant (deputy) metro editor, whom the
Employer asserts is a supervisor or managerial em-
ployee. There is an editor for each of the four main
area sections of the metro desk. The Employer also
claims these four editors are supervisors or man-
agerial employees. The Employer also seeks to ex-
clude four assistant editors, the night metro editor,
the district day and district night editor, the copy
aide supervisor, and the copy chief, alleging they
are supervisors under the Act. In addition to the
above-mentioned editors, the metro section em-
ploys approximately 90 employees: several editors
whose exclusion is not sought here, approximately
60 reporters, and numerous aides, messengers, and
clerks.
The deputy metro editor, Tom Wilkinson, is the
principal assistant to the AME. Metro AME
Downie testified that Wilkinson helps prepare the
budget for the department. Downie also described
the hiring process for the metro desk. He testified
that there are three hiring methods used at the
Post.9 7 One method involves unsolicited applica-
tions, which are screened first by the AME-person-
nel, Elsie Carper. Carper fowards applications to
Deputy Editor Wilkinson, who further screens
them. Negatively rated candidates receive no fur-
ther review; however, if Wilkinson considers an
applicant worthy of further consideration, he for-
wards it to the AME. The AME, if interested, may
then invite the area editor's opinions, and, together
with the AME, the deputy editor, and the area
editor, interviews the prospective hire. If the metro
editors desire to hire a reporter, Executive Editor
Bradley and Managing Editor Simons will be noti-
fied. They review the applicant's qualifications and
may accept the hiring determination without fur-
ther review, or they may conduct further investiga-
tion or interviews.
Potential reporters may also be referred to the
metro department through "word-of-mouth" from
reporters, editors, or friends. Finally, the Post en-
gages in active recruitment to fulfill coverage
needs or affirmative action programs. The metro
department is an entry point for young reporters,
and the turnover is larger than on other desks. It is
also the largest news desk, and the hiring needs are
concomittantly great. The district and other area
97 Compare fn. 94, above.
editors are involved in these selection processes, as
described more fully below.
The Union concedes that the deputy metro
editor is involved in the hiring process. Further,
the record indicates that Wilkinson is acting AME
for the 2 days a week that the AME is not present
in the department, and during the AME's vacation.
We also note that the Guild's claim that only the
AME is a supervisor in the metro department is
particularly untenable in light of the fact that the
supervisor-to-employee ratio would then be 1:99.
Although it is clear that the executive and manag-
ing editors maintain an ultimate control over the
operation of the news department, this does not
mean that there is no effective supervisory or man-
agerial direction at the lower editorial levels. On
the basis of this record, particularly in light of Wil-
kinson's role in hiring, we conclude that the deputy
metro editor position is a supervisory one and must
be excluded from the unit. 98
The four area editors are responsible for beat and
general assignment reporters who report directly to
the editor. Fred Barbash, the Maryland editor, is
responsible for the coverage of news within the
Maryland jurisdiction. There are 11 reporters
working in the Maryland section and operating
from outgoing bureaus which Barbash oversees. A
number of reporters cover particular beats-city
hall or the courts-while others are available for
assignment to stories as they occur. Although the
AME generates ideas on the particular stories the
section should cover, Barbash is free to initiate and
direct stories. If another reporter is needed to
cover news in Maryland, he may meet with an-
other area editor and secure a reporter temporarily.
More permanent transfers within the metro depart-
ment result from recommendations by the area
editor, but the final decision is made by the AME.
Barbash, as well as all editors, including the AME,
edits copy, and may return copy to a reporter with
directions to revise it. In these circumstances, the
editor and the reporter discuss the need for the
changes. The AME reviews all major area stories
before deadline, as does Wilkinson. As noted
above, the Maryland editor interviews prospective
hires referred by the deputy editor or AME. Rec-
ommendations are made to the AME, who, along
with the executive and managing editor, retains the
ultimate authority to hire.
Virginia editor, Judy Nicol, and District editor,
Herb Denton, operate similarly to the Maryland
editor. There are 11 reporters working for the Vir-
ginia desk. These reporters are rarely observed by
the AME, although he does read their copy. The
98 Bulletin Company. supra at 349.
203
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Virginia editor insures that the beat and general as-
signment reporters provide the paper with ade-
quate coverage of Virginia. Like Barbash, Nicol in-
terviews prospective employees who may work in
the Virginia section. Denton, in addition to over-
seeing the largest group of reporters, is also active-
ly involved in the Employer's affirmative action
program.
Another section of the metro desk is the Weekly
section, which evolved from the Panorama section
of the newspaper. Panorama had been a soft news
weekly section, appearing separately within the
paper but under the metro desk. The Company
subsequently decided to publish three general sec-
tions once a week concentrating on Virginia,
Maryland, or District news, respectively. Weekly
Editor Stan Hinden utilizes a staff of 12 employees,
including 2 assistant editors, several reporters, and
news aides. Testimony of AME Downie and assis-
tant Weekly editor, McCallister, indicated that
Hinden was involved in the decision to hire part-
time copy editors, interviewed prospective employ-
ees, and made recommendations to the AME.
Although the Union contests the supervisory
status of these four area editors, it concedes that
they have made recommendations with respect to
the hire and transfer of employees on the metro
staff, have authorized overtime for reporters, and
have required rewrites. The Guild primarily argues
that the editor's effectiveness and exercise of inde-
pendent judgment in these matters are nonexistent
because of the daily control of the AME. Howev-
er, the record establishes that the Virginia, Mary-
land, District, and Weekly editors handle assign-
ments to beat reporters, are involved in changing
beats, and approve overtime of the 5-30 reporters
under them. On the basis of this record, which es-
tablishes the frequent independent exercise of var-
ious supervisory powers by the area metro editors,
we conclude they are first-line supervisory person-
nel who must be excluded from the unit.9 9
The night metro editor, Bill Brady, works from
3 p.m. until approximately 11 p.m., and is the rank-
ing editor on the metro desk after 8 p.m. His initial
duties upon arrival at the Company include study-
ing the daily assignment sheet, participating in edi-
torial planning, and editing copy for content. After
the day editors, including the AME, depart from
work, Brady observes late news developments.
During this time, two unassigned reporters are
scheduled, as well as the night District editor, Bill
Elsen. Reporters who finish their assignment early
may also be present on the metro desk. Brady as-
signs work to these reporters as necessary to inves-
9g Bulletin Company, supra, 226 NLRB at 350-351: The News-Journal
Company, 227 NLRB 568 (1976).
tigate and write late-breaking stories. This editor
also reshapes the metro page as the importance of
news items or stories change during the evening.
On occasion, Brady telephones the AME to discuss
the advisability of such restructuring. The AME
also monitors late news stories from his home, and
sometimes calls the night editor to analyze the
news and decide what, if any, action should be pur-
sued. The record also reveals that Brady once rec-
ommended the disciplining of a reporter, but the
AME independently reviewed the situation before
instituting the discipline. Also, Brady has studied
the affirmative action needs of the metro desk.
The Employer argues that the night metro editor
is a supervisor primarily because he can assign
work to reporters and is the highest ranking editor
on the metro desk during the evenings. However,
the record indicates that the discretion used in as-
signing stories to reporters is limited, both because
of the small number of reporters assigned to the
night metro operations and the nature of the stories
assigned; i.e., fast-breaking, late-developing stories
which the paper is required to cover. Such respon-
sibility is in keeping with the Employer's standards
for preparing a quality newspaper, and is essential-
ly "production" work. 0 0° ° Indeed, the limited dis-
cretion of the night metro editor is further illustrat-
ed by the fact that the AME calls on occasion to
discuss with the editor the need for proper cover-
age. And it is for this reason, i.e., that the AME
keeps in contact with developments on the metro
desk, that we find unpersuasive the argument that,
because Brady is the ranking editor during the
evenings, he is a supervisor. 1 01 Accordingly, we
conclude that the night metro editor should not be
excluded from the unit.
The copy aide supervisor, Paul McCarthy, re-
ports to the AME-metro. He is in charge of the 21
messengers and copy and news aides utilized by
the metro department. The record establishes that
McCarthy is responsible for the hiring of the copy
aides. The Guild does not contest this fact, but
argues only that, because this position has been in-
cluded in the unit since prior to 1970, it should not
be excluded now. However, we have rejected this
argument for purposes of this case, 10 2 and thus
will exclude the copy aide supervisor as a supervi-
sor within the meaning of the Act.
The metro copy desk is responsible for the final
editing of all metro copy. The copy desk makes
'00 See National Broadcasting Company, Inc., 160 NLRB 1440 (1966);
The Herald Star, Canton Division, Thomason Newspapers, Inc., 227 NLRB
505 (1976).
o01 Cf. Shadecrest Health Care Center, 225 NLRB 1081, 1082 (1977);
Sol Henkind, an Individual, d/b/a Greenpark Care Center, 231 NLRB 753
(1977).
102 See discussion at sec. 1, supra.
204
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
sure that the copy is grammatically correct. In ad-
dition to editing copy, the copy desk writes head-
lines. The chief copy editor, Rick Reikowsky per-
forms some of the copy editing work. However,
the bulk of that work is performed by the six to
seven full-time and six to seven part-time copy edi-
tors.
The chief copy editor assigns copy editing and
headline writing to the editors who sit on the desk.
He also reviews the work of the individual copy
editors. The metro chief copy editor also deter-
mines the schedules of the copy editors and ap-
proves overtime. The record also indicates that the
chief copy editor has hired employees in the past,
but recently has hired only part-time copy editors.
Moreover, Reikowsky on one occasion discharged
a copy editor.
Although we have determined elsewhere in this
case that some chief copy editors are not supervi-
sors, we conclude based on all of the above that
the metro chief copy editor is a supervisor who
should be excluded from the unit.' 0 3
In addition to the four area editors, there are six
subordinate area editors, including a day District
editor, a night District editor, and assistant Virgin-
ia, Maryland, State, and Weekly editors, who the
Employer asserts should also be excluded from the
unit.
Judy Mann is the incumbent day District editor.
As described by various witnesses, Mann's function
is to work with some of the metro reporters to de-
velop stories. Reporters and editors maintain con-
tact with each other as a story is covered. The
editor is a resource guide for the reporter and may
help shape or direct a story. Testimony by former
assistant editors, Hanrahan and Barker, indicates
that reporters also investigate and develop stories
on their own initiative. As noted above, the AME
and area editor also provide direction and analysis
for the stories and issues they desire to be covered.
The record is not clear on how many reporters the
day District editor edits. It does indicate that, like
other metro editors, Mann spends the bulk of her
time editing for content the product of the report-
er. In addition to these general editorial duties, the
day District editor is the ranking editor on Sunday;
it appears that the AME works on Saturday. Al-
though the Employer asserts that the day District
editor and other subordinate editors discussed here
are involved in hire and discharge decisions, there
is little direct evidence of such participation. The
Employer relies primarily on the argument that a
conflict of interest between these lower-ranking
editors and the reporters exists by virtue of the as-
103 Bulletin Company. supra, 226 NLRB at 351.
signing and editing process, and because of this
their exclusion from the unit is warranted.
The Board has recognized that not all direction
or involvement by editors with reporters in the
news industry is supervisory in nature. Thus, the
Board has found that where editors assign report-
ers to events by mutual consent, and the editor's
primary duty is to check the quality of the copy
and require unsatisfactory copy to be rewritten, the
editor's authority was clearly routine and not su-
pervisory.'04 Indeed, the Board has noted that al-
though editors may have been delegated the re-
sponsibility for the efficient function of the news-
room, such responsibility sometimes calls for the
exercise of only such judgment and execution of
only such tasks as appropriately fall within the
scope of the newswriting craft or profession.' ° 5 In
our opinion, the record establishes that although
the day District editor, as well as the assistant
Maryland, Virginia, and State editors, assign work
and provide direction to reporters, the nature of
the relationship is not supervisory but that of a
working leadman. Even though some of the assis-
tant editors have engaged in interviews with pro-
spective employees, or have made comments to su-
perior editors regarding the quality of a reporter's
work, that is insufficient to render these editorial
positions supervisory, especially considering the
fact that there are two higher levels of supervi-
sion-the area editor and AME in charge of the
metro department.
The assistant Weekly editor, Mason McAllister,
is involved in the layout, graphics, and production
of the Weekly section. Another editor, Ann Mar-
iano, primarily does layout. McAllister, like Hinden
and Mariano, contacts freelance writers. Although
the photographer generates some of his own as-
signments, McAllister may also make assignments
to him. McAllister is in charge of the Weekly sec-
tion during Hinden's absence, but the record indi-
cates that, prior to his vacations, Hinden lists and
informs McAllister of many of the tasks required to
be performed.
Contrary to the Employer, we do not find the
assistant Weekly editor is a statutory supervisor.
The Weekly group in the metro department is a
small operation of approximately 12 employees. We
have found above that the Weekly editor, Hinden,
is a supervisor of this group. Some of the employ-
ees for Weekly have set tasks, such as layout.
There are not many reporters, and Hinden effec-
tively heads the department. The evidence on
McAllister's supervisory authority is not persua-
104 The Peoria Journal Star. Inc., 117 NLRB 708. 710 (1957) The
Herald Star. supra.
'o 1 NVaional Broadcasting Corporation. supra.
205
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
sive, and we therefore decline to exclude this
editor from the unit.
C. Style Desk
Style was introduced as a new separate section
to the newspaper in late 1968. As described by
AME Shelby Coffey, this section was a transforma-
tion of the "traditional women's" section of the
newspaper, and contains feature articles-longer,
in-depth stories about particular people or issues-
as well as regular news stories on, among other
things, entertainment, society, travel, and food. In
addition to the daily Style section, the newspaper
produces a Thursday Food subsection, as well as
Arts, Travel, Living, and Show subsections on
Sunday. The Style desk, as with other departments,
is headed by an AME. 10 6 Under the AME are var-
ious editors whom the Employer seeks to exclude:
deputy editors for culture and feature stories, pro-
jects editor, night editor, copy chief editor, two as-
sistant editors, and editors for Travel, Living, and
two for Food. There are approximately 30 report-
ers1 0 7 who work for the Style section, and 14
copy editors. 08
The AME takes responsibility for hiring report-
ers and editors for the Style section. Reporters or
subordinate editors sometimes make suggestions on
possible candidates for hire and on occasion attend
lunches or dinners with prospective hires. In these
instances, the AME also interviews the prospective
reporter or editor, or may consult with the execu-
tive editor concerning salary offers.10 9 The final
hiring decision within the department rests with
the AME. The AME also makes determinations on
daily matters such as schedules, vacations, and
travel.
The AME generally works 9:30 a.m. to 7:30
p.m., or later, as necessary. The AME may also
work weekends. Moreover, the AME keeps in con-
tact with the night crew, since he receives the
"capital" or first edition of the newspaper, and may
call the Style desk with suggestions and recommen-
dations.
During the week, the AME holds two daily
news conferences in his office, which are attended
by various editors. The first of these meetings lasts
'O6 The current AME, Shelby Coffey, was installed in July 1976.
101 This number includes approximately 15 "critics."
108 In addition, there are four news aides, two full-time and seven
part-time copy aides, and a confidential secretary.
o10 Several examples of this process were described at the hearing.
Nancy Collins was suggested as a qualified candidate for a reporter posi-
tion by, among others, deputy editor (features) Sandy Rovner and report-
er Sally Quinn. Collins was hired after interviews with AME Coffey, and
AME (personnel) Elsie Carper, Managing Editor Howard Simons, and
Executive Editor Ben Bradlee. Similarly, when a reporter appeared to be
leaving the paper, several editors, including AMEs of Metro and Foreign
as well as Style, spoke to the executive editor in an attempt to retain the
particular reporter's services.
only a short time. At this meeting, the editors dis-
cuss the news budget 0 and the proposed length
for the stories. The second news conference in the
Style department is held later in the day, when the
night and copy chief editors are present. The edi-
tors discuss possible stories of interest to the Style
section which may develop over the next few days,
and longer feature stories which are ready to be
printed or are being prepared."' In addition to
discussing the various stories and deciding which
should be pursued, the editors also suggest and dis-
cuss which reporters should be assigned to the sto-
ries. The AME retains ultimate authority to decide
assignments. Indeed, on certain occasions when
these second meetings are not held, the AME will
make the necessary assignments himself. Thus, as-
signments may be made by the AME when discuss-
ing and approving story ideas and projects directly
with reporters, or with reporters and their editors.
For example, AME Coffey discussed with reporter
Michael Kernan a series concept on the American
family. The AME and reporter developed the idea,
and AME Coffey closely guided the early stories.
After the series ran in the newspaper several
months, one of the deputy editors also started edit-
ing the copy. The edited copy was then forwarded
to the AME for review. Such occurrences are not
uncommon in this department.
The special projects editor assists in developing
story ideas for Style desk reporters. This title was
newly created in January 1977, and assumed by
Phil Smith at that time. In this role, Smith reads
numerous publications and converses regularly
with reporters to evolve concepts for articles. The
projects editor also maintains the writing projects
list, which details major long-range stories that re-
porters are working on so that the style desk may
keep track of those stories. In line with project
duties, this editor deals with freelancers and may
purchase freelance work and determine the amount
to be paid. In this latter regard, the editor usually
makes payments within a particular range, and the
AME often reviews the fee decisions. According to
Coffey, the projects editor in 1977 undertook a
continuing self-study project of the style desk with
the object of analyzing the budget and functions of
the Style section.
The projects editor also edits the work of four
writers. Smith edited work prior to assuming his
position and retained this duty when he became
projects editor. Smith also is one of several editors
who act, on a rotating basis, as AME on Sundays.
" 0 The news budget is a listing and brief description of the stories of
the day for the sections.
I l The lists of events ("up-comings") and features ("take-outs") dis-
cussed at this meeting are prepared by news aides prior to the meeting.
206
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
Moreover, Smith is one of three editors who substi-
tutes for the AME during the latter's vacations or
days off.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the
special projects editor is a managerial employee
who should be excluded from the unit. We note
that the projects editor is responsible for a project
to study the Style section. While the exact nature
of this project was not explicitly defined at the
hearing, it is clear that it encompasses proposals for
revising the Style section and that the analysis con-
tained therein may lead to significant changes in
the department. In these circumstances, we believe
that the projects editor should be excluded. 1 2
The two deputy editors in the department,
Sandy Rovner and Chris Williams, are involved
with general features and cultural affairs, respec-
tively. There are four to six writers who report to
each deputy editor. These writers are responsible
for covering social events, such as White House
parties, or cultural events, like ballets or television
programming. The assignments for these stories are
usually made during the editorial conference
chaired by the AME. However, the deputy editor
can order a reporter to undertake a certain project.
On the other hand, many of the stories covered by
cultural or general feature writers are generated by
the reporters themselves. For example, the dance
critic determines which ballets to cover, and how
to write the story on the ballet. Reporters and edi-
tors speak freely concerning the scope and manner
of reporting on various events. The deputy editors
read the reporter's copy for content,' 3 and may
request that the story be altered, cut, or reshaped.
However, the content of stories prepared by critics
is rarely changed, since the critic's job is to analyze
and give his opinion about a particular event.
The deputy editors, who the Employer contends
are supervisors or managerial employees, usually
work from 10:30 a.m. to 7 p.m. Together with the
projects editor and the night editor they substitute
for the AME on a rotating basis during the AME's
absence. Reporters inform the deputy editors of
their desire for time off, which is usually granted if
staffing requirements are met. Reporters also speak
to the deputy editors to request certain stories or
duties. The deputy editors discuss these requests
with the AME. In addition to these duties, Rovner
is the Sunday editor of the Style section. However,
most of the stories for the Monday section have
been assigned prior to Sunday. Both Rovner and
Williams may contact freelancers to produce sto-
ries for the section. While each may select the free-
112 See Bulletin Company. supra, 226 NLRB at 358. Compare our dis-
cussion of the position of deputy editor in the Financial section, infra.
113 If the writer covers a night event, the night editor will edit copy.
lancer desired, Coffey has expressed his opinion
about various freelancers to the deputy editors.
Further, the amount authorized to be paid free-
lancers is within parameters set by the deputy edi-
tors' superiors. Moreover, these freelance arrange-
ments may be worked out with staff reporters as
well as outside writers, but Coffey's approval must
be secured.
The Style section also utilizes two assistant edi-
tors who read and edit reporter copy for content.
These two assistant editors have less authority than
the deputy editors. In addition to their editing
duties, they work with four to six reporters or crit-
ics in a manner similar to that of the deputy edi-
tors. That is, the assistant editors may direct and
assign reporters to particular stories, although this
is a process in which the reporter may express dis-
agreement with the direction or assignment. The
assistant editors also participate in the daily confer-
ences held in the Style department. The record
also indicates that the assistant editors, with the
other ranking editors in the section, participated in
the realignment of the department's reporters and
critics and the manner in which copy would be
controlled.
Based on this record, we conclude that the
deputy editors are supervisors under the Act, but
that the assistant editors are not. It is evident that
the relationship between the deputy editors and the
writers and critics is relaxed and informal. Report-
ers argue with editors over content and assign-
ments, and deputy editors often agree with report-
ers on these issues. Reporters also generate their
own assignments. Nevertheless, it is clear that the
deputy editors can and do give assignments to re-
porters, including critics. The deputy editors also
have been consulted about prospective personnel
changes, including hires. Further, they participate
on a regular basis in the editorial conference wher-
ein the decisions on assignment and direction of the
Style writers are made. As this record shows that
the deputy editors possess and exercise supervisory
authority, we shall exclude them from the unit.'' 4
The assistant editors do not possess the same
degree of supervisory authority as do the deputy
editors. Thus, although consulted about the realign-
ment of the Style section, it is evident that they do
not participate in the hiring or discharge of em-
ployees. Indeed, their primary contact with the re-
porters is based on development and execution of
stories. The direction by the assignment editors is
more akin to that of an experienced newspaper
person then that of a supervisor. 1 In the absence
"4 Bulletin Company. supra, 226 NLRB at 354.
11 See Suburban Newspaper Publications. supra, 226 NLRB at 156.
207
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of evidence of the exercise of independent judg-
ment in responsible direction or policy matters, we
conclude the assistant editors are not supervisors or
managerial employees.
In addition to the day editors discussed above,
there is a night editor for the Style section. James
Yenckel, the current night editor, arrives at the
Post in time to participate in the second Style con-
ference, and is informed of placement and layout
decisions for the section. He also does substantial
editing of copy as night editor. Many of the stories
covered by the Style section occur during the
evening, and the necessity for editing these stories
is the responsibility of the night editor.
Yenckel also edits the Living and Travel section
stories for the Sunday Style section. The editing at
night for the Style section involves reviewing
headlines as well as editing for content. Yenckel
may determine that a story needs to be rewritten,
and can require a reporter to do so. Yenckel also
monitors breaking news stories, and may call a re-
porter to cover an unplanned event. Because of
such developments, Yenckel can determine story
length and location. Yenckel may also change the
layout plans for the section. In doing so, he decides
on whether to "play" or "kill" a story; i.e., wheth-
er to publish a reporter's copy. Yenckel is the rank-
ing editor working in the Style department from
approximately 7:30 to 12 p.m., but Coffey receives
the capital edition of the paper and stays in contact
with Yenckel concerning stories.
Based on the record, it is evident that Yenckel is
essentially involved in production work. The as-
signment of reporters and the duty of checking the
quality of the reporters' work is routine.1 16 The
night editor's work involves considerable personal
responsibility and good judgment, but is not of a
supervisory nature.l17 That the night editor exer-
cises these responsibilities when the AME is not
present does not require a contrary result.
As in other departments of the paper, the Style
department uses copy editors who read and correct
reporter copy for typography, grammar, accuracy
and the like. In Style there is a chief copy editor,
Robert Kelleter. There is also a principal assistant
who carries out most of the assignment responsibil-
ities.'"8 Kelleter is closely involved in the layout
decision for the section. He designs page I of the
Style section, and also plans artwork for the sec-
tion. With respect to hires, Kelleter makes recom-
mendations to the AME after giving a copy editor
a tryout. Kelleter also informs Coffey of perfor-
mances of copy editors.
"6 The Peoria Journal Star, supra, 117 NLRB at 711.
7 Post-Newsweek, supra.
'8 The Employer does not seek to exclude this position.
We do not agree with the Employer that Kel-
leter's recommendation or "tryout" candidate re-
quires a determination that he is a supervisor.""
We note that the assignment functions have been
delegated by Kelleter to an assistant editor, yet no
claim is made that the assistant editor is therefore a
supervisor. We thus decline to exclude this position
from the unit.
Within the Style section are special subsections,
each headed by editors whom the Employer con-
tends are supervisory or managerial employees.
The Living section is a separate section of the
paper appearing each Sunday, and is concerned
with domestic arts, crafts, architecture, and the
like. Sara Booth Conroy became Living editor in
1971. The Living editor spends the majority of her
time writing articles; Conroy writes at least one
piece a week for the Living section. Conroy's ma-
terial is edited by Night Editor Yenckel. Conroy
also does the layout for the Living section. In addi-
tion, she reviews the copy of columnists and free-
lancers, and decides what items will be placed in
the Living section.' 2 0 In this regard, the Living
editor contacts and reviews the work of free-
lancers, selects material for placement in the news-
paper, and arranges payment of between $35 and
$75 an article. There is no set budget for the
Living section for the purchase of freelance work;
however, payments are within the range noted
above. Conroy may also request that reporters or
news aides at the Style desk write small pieces for
the Living section. In so doing, Conroy approaches
the AME for permission if the work is to be per-
formed on the Employer's work time; otherwise,
Conroy treats the employees as freelancers and
makes payments accordingly. One news aide works
part time for the Living section; this news aide also
works for the Food section. The record indicates
that Conroy probably participated in interviewing,
along with the Food editors, applicants for the aide
position and apparently expressed preference to
the AME for a particular applicant. However, it is
clear that the Food editors had input in the selec-
tion of the aide and that the ultimate hiring was
done by higher management.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the
Living editor is not a supervisor or managerial em-
ployee. The Employer's allegation of supervisory
status rests primarily on the one recommendation
regarding a news aide and a recommendation that a
particular reporter transfer to write a column for
I19 See discussion of metro copy editor, supra.
120 Although there is a regular column by writer Henry Mitchell
which usually appears within the Living section. the Employer does not
assert that the Living editor's relationship with this writer and this
column is supervisory in nature.
208
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
the Living section. The former exercise of author-
ity was both shared and limited, as detailed above.
With respect to the "transfer" of the reporter, it
appears that the Living editor recommended that
the reporter write a weekly column, but that the
recommendation was not implemented for approxi-
mately a year. This sporadic and limited exercise of
authority, as such, does not demonstrate supervi-
sory status. Nor do we conclude that the authority
to purchase freelance material proves managerial
status.' 2 ' Finally, there is no potential for conflict
of interest with respect to whether a particular em-
ployee will be permitted to write an article on
company time for the Living section since it is the
AME, not the Living editor, who makes that deci-
sion. If the AME decides that a reporter cannot
write the article on company time, then the Living
editor may contract with the employee, but that
merely creates a freelance situation, not an employ-
ee-supervisor relationship. Although the editor has
some discretion in making payments for freelance
material, it is clear that such payments are made
within set parameters. Finally, the editor's partici-
pation in planning what will appear in the section
does not demonstrate managerial status. Choosing
stories for placement in the newspaper is not a
managerial decision, but rather a journalistic and
technical judgment as to the importance of the
story to the paper's readers and the manner in
which to bring that story to the reader's atten-
tion. 122
The Employer publishes a Travel section on
Sundays and may include travel material in the
paper during the week. Morris Rosenberg, the
Travel editor at the time of the hearing, has been a
Post reporter for 22 years, and since 1967 has been
editor of the Travel section. Like the Living
editor, the Travel editor is responsible for selecting
material to be placed in the Travel section. Most of
this material is procured from freelancers. The
number of pages available for Travel articles is
usually dependent on the amount of advertising for
a particular week; accordingly, the Travel section
may appear as a separate section or as part of an-
other section of the newspaper. There are no other
employees besides the Travel editor who work on
the Travel section.
In addition to selecting and paying for freelance
material, the Travel editor also utilizes a budget to
travel for investigatory trips. The budget for the
Travel section is included in the Style section
budget, and is determined before each fiscal year.
Small trips may be taken without prior approval of
the AME. Travel which requires a large expendi-
121 See Boston After Dark, supra.
122 See Bulletin, supra at 359.
ture of the budget is usually cleared through the
AME. Rosenberg has discretion to pay freelancers
a fee usually amounting to between $25 and $100,
with an average fee of approximately $75.
It is evident from these facts that the Travel
editor is not a managerial employee as asserted by
the Employer. In preparing the section, the Travel
editor is limited to a predetermined number of
pages and a budget determined by superiors or by
circumstances in the Style section. The exercise of
judgment in purchasing freelance material and de-
ciding what trips to embark on does not amount to
the use of discretionary judgment in implementing
or determining employer policy. Accordingly, we
decline to exclude the Travel editor from the unit.
The last special subsection in the style depart-
ment under consideration here is the Food section.
This section appears every Thursday and prior to
some holidays. There are two editors in the Food
section: Executive Food Editor William Rice and
Food Editor Marian Burros. The Food section also
shares a news aide with the Living section, utiliz-
ing that news aide 4 days a week. Like other edi-
tors of the Style subsections, the Food editors pre-
pare their subsection for publication, write their
own articles, procure freelance work and read sub-
mitted manuscripts for publication. It appears that
the executive food editor has more responsibility
over budget matters such as travel and compensa-
tion for freelancers than does the food editor. Trips
taken by these editors are approved in advance by
the AME. Payments for freelance material range
between $40 and $100 which is the "going rate."
Compensation above these rates is usually ap-
proved by the AME pursuant to a recommendation
by the executive food editor. When the news aide
was hired for the Food and Living sections, the
Food editors interviewed the applicants and made
a recommendation to the AME. The AME con-
sults the executive food editor on evaluation of the
news aide, but does that evaluation himself. The
news aide does some writing, as well as clerical
and production work.' 23
Contrary to the Employer, we find that neither
the executive food editor nor the food editor quali-
fies as a supervisor or managerial employee. If both
of these editors were found to be supervisors, the
supervisor-to-employee ratio would be 2-to-1. Fur-
ther, it is clear that the AME makes the ultimate
decisions on hiring and other personnel matters and
12 When Marian Burros, the food editor, was hired, she was first con-
tacted by Executive Editor Bradlee. She was interviewed by Bradlee and
other Post eecutives. She met with Executive Food Editor Rice. but it
is clear that the decision to hire Burros was made by higher Post authori-
ties. The Company does not rely on Rice's exercise of authority with re-
spect to the hire ofr Burros in urging a supervisory finding here.
209
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that with respect to the news aide any authority of
the editors' 2 4 is both shared and very limited. As-
signments of work and evaluations are clearly rou-
tine, or based on news, not supervisory, judgment.
Moreover, consistent with our discussion concern-
ing other subsection editors, we do not find the au-
thority to use freelancers to be managerial in
nature.
D. T. V. Channels Editor
The Employer seeks to exclude the editor of
"T.V. Channels," the Sunday supplement which
contains listings of area TV programs for the week.
In addition to the seven or more pages of program
listings, T.V. Channels includes movie summaries
and highlights of certain television shows. Further,
there are cover stories and, on occasion, other arti-
cles. The supplement also includes advertisements
and puzzles. T.V. Channels falls under the jurisdic-
tion of the AME for that magazine and the Week-
end and Comic sections. There is a T.V. Channels
editor, Lawrence Laurent, as well as news aides
who work in the department.
The T.V. Channels editor writes the highlights
of various programs as well as summaries of
movies. The editor also prepares listings of local
TV programs, and does layout work for the sup-
plement in conjunction with the AME. The editor
selects the cover for the publication and coordi-
nates the procurement of an article in conjunction
with that cover. Laurent writes the cover article
approximately 26 weeks and a freelance or Post re-
porter writes the story the remaining 26 weeks.
The AME or the TV editor goes to the AME of a
particular section of the paper from which the
story for the T.V. Channels is to be written, e.g., if
the cover story involves a dance program, the
editor may go to the AME of the Style section to
request that the dance critic or a particular Style
writer prepare the article for the lead story. The
AME over T.V. Channels or the editor also may
first approach the writer to see if the writer is in-
terested in writing such a story, and then secure
the permission of the AME for that writer to draft
the article. On occasion, these stories are written
on freelance time which requires the TV editor to
make a payment of approximately $75 for the
piece. A TV editor may also procure articles from
outside the newspaper for which freelance fees are
paid.
In addition to the editor, several news aides
work in the T.V. Channels department. These in-
clude part-timers as well as a full-time news aide.
The editor of the T.V. Channels has interviewed
121 It appears that the executive food editor exercises more "author-
ity" in this area than the food editor.
prospects for the news aide slots. The AME also
has been involved in the hiring of the part-time and
full-time news aide positions. The news aides are
responsible for correcting and changing television
logs that appear in the T.V. Channels and in the
daily newspaper.' 2 5 The news aides may also get
the names of guests on public affairs programs. In
addition, they go over the mail, type, file, and pre-
pare copy. When the editor is on leave, the full-
time news aide is in charge of the department.
The record does not establish the T.V. Channels
editor as a supervisory or managerial employee. It
is clear that this editor's primary responsibility is
preparing the TV listing and insuring the comple-
tion of the publication for Sunday printing. In addi-
tion, the editor has primary responsibilities for
writing or procuring columns to be placed in T.V.
Channels. There is no evidence that the editor ex-
ercises supervisory authority with respect to the
news aides. Moreover, the record shows that the
procurement of freelance material is highly struc-
tured, many times coming from other writers on
the newspaper, and that the payment of freelance
fees is fixed. On these facts, it is clear that the TV
editor should continue to remain in the unit.
E. Outlook and Book World
Outlook is a Sunday section of approximately
eight pages which incorporates news analysis, in-
depth articles, and the editorial and op-ed pages for
the newspaper. 2 6 An AME is in charge of both
the Outlook and Book World sections, although
the AME, Harry Rosenfeld, spends the majority of
his time supervising the Outlook section.' 2 7 In ad-
dition to the AME, the Outlook section utilizes an
editor, Alexander Horne, and two assistant editors.
The Employer contends that the editor of Outlook
is a supervisor.
The approximately six articles a week which
appear in the Outlook section are obtained by the
newspaper in one of four ways. Approximately 20-
40 manuscripts a week are sent to the newspaper
unsolicited and are read by the editors. However,
the editor, rather than the assistant editors, has the
primary responsibility for reviewing these manu-
scripts. Those articles which meet the approval of
the editor are forwarded to the AME for an evalu-
ation and determination for inclusion in the Out-
look section. Articles are also referred to the Out-
look section by other desks if they do not meet the
125 The editor of the T.V. Channels does not write television reviews
for the weekly paper. This is performed by a regular Style writer, John
Carmody.
126 Outlook does not edit or prepare the editorial page which appears
on Sunday in the ()utlook section.
121 This AME at the time of the hearing also was in charge of special
projects, such as the Korean scandal investigation.
210
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
requirements of that desk but could fit within the
format of the Outlook section. A third manner in
which articles are procured for the Outlook section
is through commissioned works. These articles are
secured primarily by the AME, who has set guide-
lines and approves the payment for such material.
Finally, there are reprints from other news sources
which are published in this section. Rates for re-
printing such articles are usually set by the publish-
er of the article, although some negotiation on
price may take place.
As noted above, the editor is primarily involved
in reviewing the manuscripts, speaking with the au-
thors, and editing the publications. The two assis-
tant editors read and edit manuscripts, but are also
involved in layout, proofing, and production. They
also write headlines and perform other copy work
which the editor reviews.
Recently a new assistant editor for Outlook was
hired. This assistant editor was a former assistant
editor in the Outlook section, and also had worked
for AME Rosenfeld when the latter was AME-
metro. The AME solicited the advice of Editor
Horne concerning the advisability of hiring the
former assistant editor back into the department,
but it is clear that AME Rosenfeld made the final
decision. Similarly, when a writer was proposed as
a columnist for the Outlook section, Horne was in-
volved in securing the writer's services. However,
another reporter actually introduced the writer to
the Outlook section by notifying it that the writer
was interested in writing for Outlook. The amount
to be paid to the writer was set by the executive
editor. The authority to negotiate final payment
was delegated to Horne, who persuaded the writer
to accept an offer below the maximum set by the
executive editor. With respect to discipline, the
record indicates that on one occasion the AME re-
quested the editor to instruct one of the assistant's
to perform at a better level.
Based on the foregoing, we cannot agree with
the Employer that the editor of the Outlook sec-
tion is a supervisor or managerial employee. The
editor primarily reviews manuscripts and performs
production tasks. The editor's involvement in
hiring and discipline is clearly attenuated and does
not rise to the level of supervisory authority as en-
visioned in Section 2(11) of the Act. This is true es-
pecially considering the fact that there are only
three employees in the department, which is
headed by an active AME who spends the major-
ity of his time supervising the content of the Out-
look section. We do not believe that the "substitu-
tion" by the editor for the AME during the latter's
absence otherwise indicates supervisory status here.
Nor do we find the evidence regarding payment
for freelance work, or contracting with writers to
prepare articles for the Outlook section, sufficiently
managerial in nature to warrant the exclusion of
the editor here.
The Book World section is responsible for the
preparation of a weekly publication devoted to
review of literature, the daily book reviews, and
sections on special types of books. As indicated
previously, an AME heads both the Book World
and Outlook sections. However, the AME spends
only approximately I day a week reviewing Book
World material. There is also an editor of Book
World, who is not included in the unit. In addition,
Book World employs a managing editor, who the
Employer asserts is a supervisory and managerial
employee, three editor/critics, a secretary, and a
part-time news aide.
Most of the writing and reviewing for Book
World is done by freelancers. The editor takes the
lead role in deciding what books to review, but the
managing editor assists in the selections. Both the
editor and managing editor contact freelancers, al-
though the editor has worked out several perma-
nent relationships with freelancers for regular re-
views. The managing editor has sole responsibility
for the children's book section of Book World, and
arranges with freelancers for review of such books.
The range for payment to freelancers is from $75
to $200. These fees were set by the editor, and the
managing editor follows set guidelines on such pay-
ments.
At the time of the hearing, several editor/critics
also worked in Book World. Thus, one editor was
responsible for reviews of records, which he either
wrote himself or secured from freelancers. This
editor also wrote a column on paperback books.
Another editor is responsible for layout, design,
and production of Book World. The editor of
Book World testified that the managing editor
"sees that [the work] gets done." The record indi-
cates that the managing editor assigns some work,
although it is clear that each subordinate employee
has several regular duties to perform, such as re-
viewing or layout. When the editor interviewed a
prospective transfer for the department, he solicit-
ed the managing editor's opinion of the employee.
The editor also testified that he told the managing
editor to decide on the status of the part-time news
aide, who was a probationary employee at the
time. The managing editor decided to retain the
news aide, who continues to work in the section.
Since this record demonstrates the managing edi-
tor's responsible involvement in personnel decisions
and his authority responsibly to direct Book World
employees, we conclude that the managing editor
is a supervisor and must be excluded from the unit.
211
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
F. Photo and Art Department
The Employer maintains a photo and art depart-
ment to take photographs and produce graphics for
the newspaper. This department employs approxi-
mately 8-9 artists and 14 photographers. The Em-
ployer argues that three editors in the photo sec-
tion, and the director and assistant director of art,
should be excluded from the unit as either supervi-
sory or managerial employees.
The AME for this department' 2 8 is involved in
many of the daily supervisory and managerial func-
tions of the photo section. The AME usually works
from 9:30 a.m. to 6:45 or 7:45 p.m. during the
week. Assignments, including beat assignments,
may be made by the AME, although some assign-
ments may be generated by the photographers
themselves. The AME prepares work schedules for
the photographers on a rotating basis. The AME
also assigns photographers to stories until the
photo assignment editor arrives at the office.
As mentioned above, there are 14 photographers
employed in this section,'2 9 as well as 3 aides and
the 3 editors whom the Employer seeks to exclude
from the unit. Photographers are generally present
at the newspaper from 7 a.m. until midnight, al-
though photographers may work overtime as re-
quired. Shifts during the day are staggered. Ap-
proximately five employees in this section work on
beats; e.g., a photographer may be permanently as-
signed to cover the White House or Capitol Hill.
For those photographers not assigned to a beat, as-
signments are generated by stories breaking on
other desks. For example, a story may occur which
falls within the jurisdiction of the metro desk; a
person from metro would call the photo desk and
request that a photographer be assigned to that par-
ticular story. This process is discussed more fully
below.
Picture Editor, Susan Eisert, who arrives at
10:30 or 11 a.m., works closely with the national
desk and attends Managing Editor Simons' twice-
weekly news conferences. Eisert is also involved in
assignment of photographers, especially on out-of-
town projects, for which she is consulted by the
AME. In line with duties connected with national
desk pictures, the picture editor presides over the
procurement of and payment for freelance work.
The need for freelance photographs arises from the
countrywide scope of the national desk and the
limitation of staffing in the photo department. In
contacting freelancers, Eisert works from a long-es-
125 Matthew Lewis was the AME at the time of the hearing, having
assumed that position in approximately December 1976. Lewis is a
former photographer.
12g There are three other photographers employed by the Post who
work separately for the Sports, Weekly, and Magazine desks, respective-
ly.
tablished list and the range of fees to be paid for
freelance work is fixed.
The record reveals that Eisert, in conjunction
with the AME, has reviewed candidates for hire
and has made recommendations regarding a pro-
motion. Furthermore, Eisert assisted AME Lewis
in reviewing and reorganizing the photo depart-
ment. This restructuring was carried out shortly
after Lewis' appointment as AME, and Lewis con-
sulted with Eisert and effectuated many of her rec-
ommendations.
In view of the above, we agree with the Em-
ployer that the position of picture editor should be
excluded from the unit. It is clear that Eisert has
been a close consultant of the AME, and bears
major responsibility for direction within the photo
section. The sum of the picture editor's responsibil-
ities compels the conclusion that the picture editor
should not be included in the unit because of her
supervisory duties.
The photo assignment editor, Ed Heiberger, is
responsible for selecting photographers to fill the
call-in requests from other newspaper departments
for photos to accompany stories. When appointed,
Heiberger replaced Arthur Ellis, who acted for a
while as a photo assignment editor but without as-
suming that title.' 3 0 At least half of the time, Hei-
berger chooses a photographer for assignment
based on availability. Of the 14 photographers in
the department, 5 work on specific beats. The re-
maining nine congregate in a waiting room for as-
signments, although the record reveals that rarely
are all nine present at the same time since the
schedule is staggered over shifts from 7 a.m. to
midnight. Thus, availability is a major factor in de-
termining assignments in this department. On par-
ticular stories, however, the photo assignment
editor may select a photographer because of his
skill and enthusiasm. After completing an assign-
ment, a photographer may call in to the office or
speak to the office by way of a two-way radio, and
be directed to a new assignment. 131 While most
photographers decide on the method and angle of
shooting a picture, Heiberger may direct photogra-
phers to take pictures in a certain manner. More-
over, photographs are reviewed by the assignment
editor, and reprints may be ordered. Photographers
are primarily responsible for the printing of film.
The night picture editor, James McNamara, per-
forms duties at night similar to those done by the
photo assignment editor during the day. The night
editor is essentially the only editor present Wednes-
31o Ellis is designated "chief photographer." The Employer does not
claim Ellis is a supervisor.
'I' Testimony indicates that, on occasion, one photographer may
convey the next assignment to another photographer.
212
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
day through Friday evenings and on the weekend.
He makes assignments, monitors wire photos, and
deals with freelancers. The night picture editor
may alter a photographer's hours or call in a pho-
tographer at night to cover a breaking story.
Based on the record, it is evident that neither the
photo assignment editor nor the night picture
editor are supervisors or managerial employees.
The major task of these editors-the assignment of
photographers to stories-is largely routine. More-
over, neither editor exhibits any other authority or
indicia of supervisory or managerial status. That
one of these editors may direct that a reprint be
made of a picture, or indicate that a certain angle is
better for a picture, does not warrant a contrary
result. Nor does the fact that Heiberger and McNa-
mara saw the reorganization plan conceived by
AME Lewis and picture editor Eisert demonstrate
managerial status. Moreover, we believe it relevant
that, were these 2 editors found to be supervisors,
there would be 4 supervisors to 14 photographers.
We think that these two editors have duties and re-
sponsibilities akin to assignment editors, whom we
have previously found herein not to be supervi-
sors. 1 32
The Employer further maintains that the art di-
rector, Terry Dale, and assistant art director,
Harold Hoover, are supervisors and managers and
must be excluded from the unit. The art depart-
ment is under the overall supervision and direction
of AME Lewis. As noted, there are nine other art-
ists in the employ of the Post. Four work during
the day and three during the evening, Monday
through Friday; two artists work on the weekend,
when neither editor is usually present. The art sec-
tion, like the photo section, serves the needs of
other desks of the newspaper. Requests for graph-
ics are initiated by a news desk and transmitted to
the art section for completion. If the graphic
cannot be finished as requested, the art section con-
tacts the originating desk to work out a solution to
the problem.
The art director is responsible for assignments
and schedules during the day. The assignments, ini-
tiated by a request as described above, are made on
the basis of predefined designation (e.g., the same
artist draws the weather map each day), availabil-
1'2 The Employer argues that Heiberger's position is similar to that of
Picture Editor Brothers in Bulletin Company, 226 NLRB at 354 Hei-
berger, like Brothers, makes decisions regarding assignments and picture
use. However, the Employer overlooks the fact that Brothers was solely
responsible for evaluating photo desk employees, made final decisions
with respect to hiring, and interviewed candidates for jobs. Brothers,
unlike Heiberger or McNamara, also evaluated, promoted, and trans-
ferred employees. The record here falls far short of that in Bulletin.
Indeed, Brothers' position there appears more akin to that of AME Lewis
in the instant case. In this regard, we note that the manager of the pho-
tography department was included in the unit in the Bulletin case. Bulle-
tin Company, supra., 226 NLRB at 354-355.
ity, and specialty. The art director, while perform-
ing these responsibilities, also does artwork. In ad-
dition to these duties, the art director is involved in
the hiring process in the art section and in making
decisions about the use of freelancers for the de-
partment. Thus, the art director has interviewed
prospective hires and discussed them with the per-
sonnel AME, the executive editor, and the manag-
ing editor. More recently, Art Director Terry Dale
interviewed and selected three candidates for a car-
tographer position to present to higher manage-
ment. There was testimony that Dale had the final
choice on who was selected. The AME had no
input on the hiring decision.
When Dale was appointed art director, in March
1977, he undertook an evaluation and reorganiza-
tion of the art department. He drafted and, after
management review, circulated memos detailing as-
signments, schedules, and other procedural matters
for the art department. Although these memos
quantified several preexisting procedures, they also
set policy directives. Further, the art director pre-
pares a budget for the department and submits it to
the AME.13 3 Moreover, Art Director Dale was a
member of a committee which studied and evaluat-
ed the graphic needs of the newspaper.
The foregoing establishes, in our opinion, that
the art director is a supervisor and thus should be
excluded from the unit. While higher management
appears to review hiring and policy decisions, the
art director does make effective recommendations
and takes dispositive action in these areas. Further,
the art director appears to operate somewhat apart
from the AME's supervision, as evidenced by the
independent hiring process in this section. The
record reveals that the art director responsibly dir-
ects the artists and exhibits other indicia of supervi-
sory status and thus should be excluded from the
unit.
The assistant art director, Hal Hoover, works at
night with other artists. Testimony indicates that
the assistant art director spends considerable time
performing unit work.'3 4 Besides performing regu-
lar artwork, the assistant art director also checks
the artwork of the first edition, part of which is
done in the composing and engraving room, and
performs additional layout work if necessary.
Hoover is not involved in hiring or discharge. He
prepares work schedules, although the record indi-
cates they have not changed for many years. As-
"' The AME has suggested to the executive editor that the art budget
be submitted directly to the budget committee, but as of the hearing such
a change had not occurred.
1i4 When Dale circulated his memos, he stated that Hoover was not to
do artwork. The record shows, however, that Hoover performs tasks
throughout his shift
213
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
signments in the evening are handled like those in
the day; however, late in the evening shift, only
one artist works with Hoover.
The record falls short of establishing that the as-
sistant art director is a supervisory or managerial
employee. In this regard, we note that neither the
art director nor the assistant art director is present
on the weekend, when two artists are working and
performing functions similar to Hoover. Further, it
appears that, if an editor is not working, an artist
may deal with freelancers. The record is devoid of
any other facts which suggest that Hoover pos-
sesses any of the authority exercised by Dale. Since
Hoover spends much of his working hours per-
forming artist's work, we believe his position is
more akin to a rank-and-file employee than a super-
visor or managerial employee.'35
G. Financial Desk
The financial desk at the Post has grown recent-
ly. Thus, from a base of four reporters, the staff in-
creased to approximately eight, including a report-
er stationed in New York. The recently expanded
real estate portion of the paper also falls under the
jurisidcition of the financial desk. In addition to re-
porting about the stock market and related devel-
opments, the financial desk covers, among other
things, Federal agency regulations, banking, hous-
ing, transportation, local and metropolitan business
news, and other economic issues. These areas are
covered by reporters with defined beats, as well as
by general reporters.
The AME-financial, Peter Silberman, was in-
volved extensively in the expansion of the depart-
ment. While recommendations for expansion had
been presented to management on several prior oc-
casions, it was not until 1974 that the AME's sug-
gestions were finally approved by the Employer's
executives. In preparation for the expansion, the
AME requested William Jones, deputy financial
editor, to draft a memorandum explaining the need
for an expanded financial desk staff. Jones prepared
a memorandum, which the AME reviewed; using
these ideas, the AME wrote his own memorandum
and presented the case for expansion to the man-
agement editors, who approved an increase in re-
porters and column space. In a similar manner, the
AME restructured the real estate section, as more
fully discussed below.
The AME is involved in all major decisions af-
fecting the department. Thus, the applicants to fill
the newly created positions in the expanded finan-
cial desk were interviewed and hired solely by the
13I That Dale may have spoken with Hoover concerning the reorgani-
zation plan does not establish, without more, that Hoover is a managerial
employee.
AME. The beat assignments in the department also
are approved by the AME. Similarly, the AME
grants vacations. The AME's responsibilities also
include preparing the budget proposal for the fi-
nancial desk. This, like budgets submitted by other
desks, is sent to the executive editor and the budget
committee for ultimate approval.
The deputy financial editor has been the
"number 2 man" in the department at least since
1969. His duties have remained relatively constant
during these years. William Jones, the deputy
editor at the time of the hearing, 36 primarily
writes stories. He averages 10-12 stories a week.
These may appear in the business and finance sec-
tion of the paper, or, on occasion, on the front
page.'37 Jones was hired by Hobart Rowan, the
AME before Silberman. Shortly after Silberman re-
placed Rowan as AME, the decision to expand the
department and reorganize the real estate section
was made. Silberman, prior to assuming the job as
AME, worked as a national editor. As indicated
previously, the deputy editor was involved in the
expansion of the financial desk and the real estate
section. Thus, as noted above, Silberman requested
Jones to prepare a memo on the need for expansion
of the department. The deputy editor also supplied
a list of 12 writers for consideration because of the
increase in reporter slots. Similarly, the AME
asked the deputy editor's opinion about certain re-
porters and editors and the need for restructuring
the real estate section. However, the decision to
transfer reporter Ross, and to appoint Claudia
Levy as assistant editor for real estate was made by
the AME. In addition to reporting, the deputy fi-
nancial editor may assign reporters to stories, al-
though the AME makes most assignments. More-
over, the deputy financial editor is in charge of the
desk when the AME is on vacation. In this regard,
the deputy editor speaks with the AME prior to
the latter's leaving, and does not deviate from es-
tablished routine in the department. The AME
calls in during absences.
Based on this record, we cannot agree with the
Employer that the deputy financial editor is a man-
agerial or a supervisory employee. Although Jones,
as deputy editor, was involved in the expansion
plans for the financial desk and the changes in the
real estate section, he did so at the behest of the
AME and because, as the person most familiar
with the entire financial desk structure, Jones could
provide useful information to the AME. While
:'i Jones was "promoted" to deputy financial editor in 1975, but, ap-
parently, had been performing the duties for a longer period.
"7' As with other desks, the AME attends the daily news conferences
chaired by the executive editor where decisions regarding front page (or
A-i) stories are made.
214
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
Jones may have desired and urged such changes,
he was not the managerial entity determining
whether they would go into effect. Thus, it is well
established that employees, too, are concerned
about improving working conditions. The changes
in the financial desk were made to improve the
quality of work produced by that desk, and merely
because Jones would want such a result is not in-
imical to his employee status. For similar reasons,
merely because the AME sought the advice of the
deputy editor on certain personnel matters does not
establish the deputy's position as a statutory super-
visor. It is unrefuted that the deputy editor was not
involved in any fashion with the interviewing and
hiring of reporters for new slots. Nor does the
deputy editor make recommendations concerning
discharge. Further, it cannot be overlooked that
the deputy editor spends a substantial portion of his
working hours-described in testimony as much as
80-90 percent of his time-writing stories. The
time he spends in making assignments is certainly
de minimis and routine, and, in light of the above,
does not warrant exclusion of this position.
The assistant financial editor is the copy chief
editor on the financial desk. There are usually two
copy editors who edit, write headlines, and assist
on production work in the composing room. 1'3
The assistant financial editor, Charles Puffenbarger,
gives copy editing work to the copy editor based
on availability, although certain stories may be
given to employees who have expertise in specific
areas. Such duties occupy approximately 50 per-
cent of the assistant financial editor's day. When
first arriving at the desk,'3 9 the assistant financial
editor reviews copy which has come in over the
wire services. Stories of particular interest are re-
ferred to the reporter who covers the appropriate
beat. The assistant financial editor also prepares the
news budget for the daily conferences. Additional-
ly, the assistant financial editor is engaged in layout
and design work for the financial pages. In this ca-
pacity, the assistant financial editor places stories,
including the lead or headline stories, but the AME
often is consulted on or reviews layout decisions.
There are also standard items such as the stockmar-
ket reports which are printed daily. Further, design
and layout considerations often determines the
length of a story, and sometimes requires cutting a
story. In making such cuts, the assistant financial
editor consults with the reporter who wrote the
story.
,'a There were three individuals who performed copy editing work at
the time of the hearing. One, Sullivan, did copy editing half of the time.
and wrote the remaining time. She was hired by the AME. There also
was one full-time and one other part-time copy editor.
'Jg The assistant financial editor usually starts work between 10:30 and
II a.m.
Based on the record as a whole, we conclude
that the assistant financial editor is not a supervi-
sor. The assignment of stories to reporters and
preparation of the news budget are clearly routine
in nature, and do not involve discretion or indepen-
dent judgment. Further, unlike the Bulletin'4 0 situ-
ation relied on by the Employer, the record here
does not show responsible direction of copy editors
commensurate with supervisory authority. Thus,
here the AME, not the assistant financial editor,
determines the schedules, vacations, and other
working conditions of the copy editors, whereas in
the Bulletin these powers rested with the copy desk
chief.
As already mentioned, the real estate department
falls under the financial desk's jurisdiction. Three
employees work for the real estate section; the Em-
ployer seeks to exclude the two assistant editors,
John Willmann and Claudia Levy. Real Estate ap-
pears as a separate section in the newspaper on Sat-
urday. During the rest of the week, real estate sto-
ries are submitted to the financial desk. Of the two
assistant editors for Real Estate'41 one, Willmann,
does not perform editing, but exclusively writes a
weekly column as well as other stories. The other
assistant editor, Levy, edits and handles copy, lays
out the real estate pages, deals with stringers, and
occasionally writes stories. Willmann's assignments
are not controlled by Levy; Levy does assign sto-
ries to reporter Ross. Vacations, overtime work,
time off, and merit increases for real estate employ-
ees are handled by the AME. It was the AME
who made the decision to place Levy as an assis-
tant editor and Ross as a reporter in the real estate
department. The record does not reveal that Will-
mann, as assistant editor, was consulted about
either of these additions.
We cannot agree with the Employer that the as-
sistant editors for Real Estate are supervisors, as
the record evidence falls far short of warranting
such a conclusion. It appears that Levy was added
to the real estate department to improve its quality
and was delegated the responsibility for the effi-
cient functioning of that department. However,
such responsibility is part of the craft or function
of a newspaper person; it does not, without more,
convert a rank-and-file employee into a supervi-
sor.' 4 2 Thus, we conclude that the assistant editor
'40 226 NLRB at 351-352.
"' Claudia Levy was made an assistant editor in January 1977; John
Willmann was the other editor; and Nancy Ross was a reporter for this
section.
142 See, e.g., NBC. Inc.. supra: Post-.Vewsweek Stations. Capital Area.
Inc., 205 NLRB 522 (1973).
215
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
positions occupied by Levy14 3 and Willmann' 4 4
are not supervisory.
H. Research Department
The Employer maintains a reference library
where research requests are filled. The director of
research, Mark Hannon, is excluded from the unit
already. Under the director is one librarian, Bill
Hifner, whom the Employer maintains should be
classified as a supervisory and managerial employ-
ee. There are approximately 20 other employees in
the department: assistant librarians, whose duties
include researching and indexing, and library assis-
tants, who do filing work. However, the record in-
dicates that there is functional overlap between the
two classifications. The research department re-
sponds to requests from reporters for information
or particular entries from files. Employees check
files for the reporters for printed as well as pictori-
al information. Some employees operate as "in-
dexers," clipping out stories for appropriate subject
headings; others gather articles to be placed in
byline files. There is also a traditional library with
reference material which can be checked out to re-
porters. Department employees are present at the
library from 8 a.m. to 2 a.m. during the week, and
also work during the weekend.
The director of research works from 10 a.m. to
7:30 p.m., and is in charge of overall operations
within the department.l4 5 Hannon has been direc-
tor since 1968 and has assumed the task of upgrad-
ing the Post's library facilities. Hannon coordinates
research with the various news desks to ensure effi-
cient use of the library facilities. Thus, he is in-
volved with major projects undertaken by the re-
search department and sometimes personally en-
gages in research for such projects. Major equip-
ment purchases are made by the director, who also
prepares the department's budget.
As head of the department, Hannon approves or
is involved in all hires of full-time employees. Even
when the librarian interviews particular applicants,
the director invariably reviews the candidate's cre-
dentials. Although he is concerned with the overall
functioning of the library and its progress, the di-
rector frequently walks through the working areas
to observe employees. On such occasions, Hannon
'43 The Guild asserts that the Employer's attempt to exclude Levy's
position was untimely. In view of our determination here, we need not
reach that issue.
144 The Employer admitted that Willmann did not exercise any super-
visory authority, but was in an "emeritus" position, still possessing such
authority if necessary. Having concluded that the assistant editors are not
supervisors, we are not required to decide whether a person of emeritus
status would still be a supervisor under the Act.
145 The Employer averred that the director's position was similar to
that of an AME. The Union does not dispute the exclusion of the direc-
tor.
sometimes instructs the librarian to issue a verbal
warning to an employee. Finally, all complaints
from library employees are received by Hannon.
The librarian, Hifner, works from I p.m. to 8:30
or 9 p.m. He usually works out of the bookroom,
but does not have a formal office. The librarian
does considerable research for reporters and, to-
gether with another employee who works in the
bookroom, supplies books or quotes on subjects, or
locates the same, as needed by the reporters. In
connection with these duties, the librarian reads nu-
merous publications and purchases books for the li-
brary. While the librarian possesses the discretion-
ary authority to order these books, he can spend
only within the budgeted amount, approximately
$15,000. The librarian also suggests to the director
when to prepare the research department budget.
Schedules are prepared by Hifner and rarely
changed. Weekend assignments are rotated among
employees. The director is not involved in these
decisions, nor is the director concerned with vaca-
tions or times off; the librarian is in charge of
making these decisions. As mentioned above, the li-
brarian transmits warnings at the director's request
to employees. Further, Hifner occasionally talks to
other research department employees about late-
ness or other work-related problems.
It appears from this record that the librarian is
not a supervisory or managerial employee. Hifner
does not responsibly direct employees in their
work or effectively recommend hiring or disci-
pline. In this regard, the director of research makes
final determinations on hiring; further, the director
uses the librarian as a conduit for warnings. The li-
brarian, for the most part, performs research and
other library work. In light of these facts, we are
not persuaded that the librarian is a supervisor
merely because he sometimes schedules work or re-
minds employees when they are late.1 46 Further,
we cannot agree with the Employer that the librar-
ian's function in purchasing books forms a basis for
a managerial finding here since that is simply part
of the librarian's job, and is limited in any event by
budget restraints of $15,000. As we have stated
elsewhere, "even the authority to exercise consid-
erable discretion does not render an employee man-
agerial where [the] decision must conform to . . .
established policy."'4 7 Certainly the purchase of
books is consistent with the Employer's policy of
maintaining an adequate research facility for its re-
porters.
1" See The Capital Times Company, 234 NLRB 174 (1978).
"'7 Eastern Camera Photo Corp., 140 NLRB at 471.
216
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
I. Foreign Desk
The Employer maintains 13 correspondents in
foreign countries to gather and report world
news. 14 The Employer also utilizes stringers to
report foreign stories. A separate foreign depart-
ment was created in 1968; until that time, the for-
eign and national departments together constituted
the world desk. An assistant managing editor pre-
sides over the department; since 1968, Phil Foisie
has occupied this position. There are three other
editors in the department whom the Employer
seeks to exclude: foreign editor, deputy (day)
editor, and a night editor. The foreign department
also employs seven full-time and six part-time assis-
tant foreign editors who function as copy editors.
Correspondents are chosen for their assignments
after a consultation process which usually involves
the AME, the executive editor, and the managing
editor. The correspondents usually serve a 3-year
term in their location, although these stays may be
lengthened or shortened upon request or manage-
ment determination. After returning to the newspa-
per, the correspondents are usually assigned to an-
other department. However, it is not unusual for a
foreign correspondent to be an editor on the desk
before or after stints overseas. 149
The foreign editor oversees the daily operation
of the foreign desk. The foreign editor generally
works a 12-hour day. He proposes stories to corre-
spondents, maintains telephonic contact with them,
and consults with the deputy foreign editor regard-
ing the stories to be placed in the paper. Corre-
spondents discuss travel and assignments with
either the AME or the foreign editor. Further-
more, the AME periodically visits correspondents
at their foreign location; these and other travels
occupy 2-1/2 months of the AME's working year.
During the AME's absences, the foreign editor is
responsible for the foreign desk, although no for-
eign editor has ever effectuated any changes in the
department without the AME's approval.' 5 0 Re-
sponsibility for, contact with, and control of the
stringers used by the Employer resides with the
foreign editor. While the foreign correspondents
operate somewhat autonomously during their stint,
the foreign desk, through the foreign editor, may
direct a reporter to pursue or write a specific story.
4' One of the correspondents works 6 months a year for the Employ-
er on a contract basis. The 12 cities where correspondents are located are
Bonn, Tel Aviv, Moscow, Cairo, Paris, London, Tokyo, Buenos Aires,
Beirut, Bangkok, Hong Kong, and Johannesburg. In 1963, there were
only two to three correspondents. Each correspondent controls a staff at
the foreign city from which the reporter works.
14' For example, Osnos, the foreign editor at the time of the hearing,
had been a Moscow correspondent.
"0 There have been five foreign editors since 1968. Foisie has been
AME during this time, and even served in a dual capacity as AME and
foreign editor for approximately 2 years.
The foreign editor also prepares the work sched-
ules of the desk personnel.
Although the AME, in conjunction with the
managing and executive editors, is responsible for
the placement of correspondents, he consults the
foreign editor before making the decision. In addi-
tion, the foreign editor has input into the decision
to hire other editors in the foreign department. For
example, while substituting during an AME's ab-
sence, a foreign editor hired three assistant foreign
editors.' 5 1 Although instances of discharge and
discipline are rare in this department, the foreign
editor, among others, recommended discharging a
foreign correspondent who was subsequently fired.
The budget for the foreign desk exceeds $1 million
a year. The foreign editor makes detailed recom-
mendations on budgetary matters, and oversees the
financial matters of the foreign correspondents and
bureaus.
The deputy foreign editor, or day editor, spends
the bulk of the working day reading copy and de-
ciding at the initial stage what will appear in the
newspaper. Story selections are reviewed by the
foreign editor and page-one story candidates also
are discussed at the daily news conferences. The
day editor also maintains communication with cor-
respondents, often transmitting messages from the
foreign editor. The day foreign editor may also be
consulted for recommendations on hiring.
In light of the record evidence of the foreign
editor's duties and responsibilities, we conclude
that the foreign editor possesses sufficient supervi-
sory and managerial authority to warrant exclusion
from the unit. While the AME undoubtedly con-
trols the overall operation of the foreign depart-
ment, it is the foreign editor who daily insures the
smooth functioning of the desk. On the other hand,
we cannot agree with the Employer that the
deputy (day) foreign editor must be excluded. The
mere fact that because the day foreign editor may
play a part in deciding what will appear in the
newspaper is insufficient to demonstrate his man-
agerial status. 152 Further, although the day editor
maintains frequent contact with correspondents, he
clearly is subordinate to the foreign editor in this
regard. Finally, the day editor's relationship to as-
sistant foreign editors does not provide a basis, in
light of the above, for exclusion.
The night foreign editor' 5 3 is the chief copy
desk person in this department. As indicated previ-
ously, there are seven full-time and six part-time as-
151 However, the foreign editor does not select part-time assistant for-
eign editors (copy editors).
152 See National Broadcasting Company. Inc., 160 NLRB 1440 (1966).
1i3 At one time, the night foreign editor worked during the day. The
record indicates that the copy chief would be working at night.
217
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
sistant foreign editors who work on the copy desk
and who edit, rewrite, and check copy for errors.
The night foreign editor's responsibilities include
managing the copy flow. The AME originated the
idea of having assistant foreign editors who have
some expertise in certain areas of foreign news, and
is the AME responsible for helping them develop
that expertise. The night foreign editor checks over
the copy handled by the assistant foreign editors
prior to it going to the copying room. He makes
out their work schedules; however, these schedules
generally are rotated, changes may be made by the
assistant foreign editors themselves, and the sched-
ule must be approved by the foreign editor. The
record does not contain any evidence of hiring in
this department, but it appears that, as in the na-
tional department, assistant foreign editors are
given tryouts, after which the night foreign editor
or slot man relays his appraisal to higher manage-
ment. In this regard, the evidence reveals that, for
some time, and at least just prior to the close of the
hearing, assistant foreign editors have been work-
ing in the slot at night, because the night foreign
editor worked during the day. During this period,
the employee acting as slot man passed out copy
editing assignments. Moreover, testimony indicates
that assistant foreign editors acting as slot men
made recommendations concerning the qualifica-
tion of a candidate for an assistant foreign editor
position.
Considering all of the above, we are of the opin-
ion that the night foreign editor is not a statutory
supervisor. While there are indications that the
night foreign editor does participate in the selection
and assignment processes, certain rank-and-file em-
ployees are also engaged in the tasks and have been
for a substantial period of time. That the Employer
asserts that this staffing situation will no longer
exist, i.e., that the night foreign editor will actually
be employed during the night, does not alter our
conclusion, because it is clear that, under the
record facts, the night editor does not make judg-
ments as contemplated by Section 2(11) of the Act
which requires exclusion here.
J. Sports Desk
The Employer has 15 reporters, 2 to 5 news
aides, 5 full-time and 3 to 5 part-time copy editors,
2 assistant editors, and I administrative aide report-
ing sports for the newspaper. The AME of sports
takes responsibility for all hiring decisions. 154
Many of these decisions, however, are reviewed
and ratified by the executive editor. The AME of
sports also actively involves himself in the daily re-
154 At the time of the hearing, George Solomon, former day sports
editor, was AME-sports.
porting assignments in the department. On a daily
basis he discusses coverage of events, long-term as-
signments, and story placement. For example, the
AME left a plan with the night employees on how
to cover Henry Aaron's 715th career home run.
Further, the AME determines whether to establish
new beat areas and determines beat assignments-
who will cover football, basketball, and so forth.
The AME usually works 5 days a week, Tuesday
through Saturday, although it is not uncommon
during the football season for the AME to work on
Sunday or Monday night. The AME prepares the
work schedule for other employees in this depart-
ment, and approves all overtime, time off, and va-
cation decisions. The AME enjoys 4 to 5 weeks of
vacation per year.
The day sports editor is one of three editors' 55
the Employer seeks to exclude from the unit. This
editor works hours similar to those maintained by
the AME. During the AME's vacation, the day
sports editor substitutes for him. The day sports
editor assumes primary responsibility for reading
reporter copy for content. The day editor, a posi-
tion filled by Mike Hill at the time of the hearing,
participates with the AME in long-range planning
conferences. The editor also makes recommenda-
tions to the AME concerning beats and other re-
porting assignments. Recommendations may also be
made concerning prospective hires. The day sports
editor has interviewed and screened prospective
hires. Furthermore, the day sports editor, along
with the AME, works with reporters in developing
stories, including topic and style formats. In addi-
tion to these duties, the day editor draws up the
news budget-the listing of stories of the day-for
the sports department.
The night sports editor performs somewhat anal-
ogous duties during the evening hours. This editor
is primarily responsible for moving copy written
during the day or evening. Further, the night
sports editor may call beat reporters if there are
developments on stories in their area. Because
many of the events covered by this department
occur in the evening, this editor maintains frequent
contact with many of the reporters. In this regard,
the AME may request from the night sports editor
recommendations concerning the qualifications and
progress of current and prospective employees. O.
D. Wilson, the night sports editor, also participated
as a member on the Employer's cold-type conver-
sion committee.
From this record, we find that the day sports
editor possesses and exercises supervisory authority
5' The Employer's claim to exclude a fourth position, the sports II1
editor, was abandoned because that section of the sports page, and thus
the position, no longer exists.
218
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
and for that reason must be excluded. Thus, while
the record reveals that the reporters in the sports
department are responsible for their respective beat
area, it cannot be gainsaid that direction and au-
thority is exercised by superiors in the department.
Although the evidence presented here shows that
the AME of sports maintains a high degree of con-
trol over this desk, it also supports the Employer's
assertions that the day sports editor exercises inde-
pendent authority in the direction of work within
the department.' 5 6 For similar reasons, we find
that the night sports editor also should be excluded
from the unit.'57
The chief copy editor in the sports department
works from 4:30 p.m. to I a.m., when he presides
over three to five copy editors. The functions of
the copy editors include reading copy for gram-
mar, style, and syntax. The copy chief editor as-
signs work to the copy editors; although this as-
signing usually is done on an availability basis-
whoever is not busy receives the next assignment-
the chief copy editor endeavors to hand copy con-
cerning certain topics to copy editors who are
expert or interested in that area. As in the foreign
and national departments, the sports chief copy
editor does tell the AME his opinion of the qualifi-
cations of a copy editor after a tryout. However,
based on the above, and for the reasons already
stated with respect to other chief copy editors, we
cannot conclude that the sports chief copy editor is
imbued with supervisory authority which requires
exclusion from the unit.
K. News Desk (a/k/a Night Operations)
The major functions of the news desk are to de-
termine placement of all news and graphics from
the metro, foreign, and national desks,'5 8 and co-
ordinate production of the daily and advance edi-
tions of the newspaper. Ben Cason is the AME in
charge of the news desk. The news desk also uti-
lizes nine other editors and two news aides. The
Employer asserts that the news, production, swing,
chief makeup, and late news editors are supervisors
or managerial employees. It also claims that metro
news editor is a supervisor. That is, the Employer
seeks to exclude six of the nine editors below the
rank of AME. No such claims are made for the
world news and two makeup editors. The Employ-
'56 See, e.g., A. S. bell Company, 81 NLRB 82. 87 (1949).
151 Bulletin Company, 226 NLRB at 355.
We are cognizant of the Guild's assertion that two assistant editors
who substitute on a regular basis (two times a week) for the day sports
editor are not sought to be excluded by the Employer. However, the
record does not reveal that those assistant editors have the same daily
imput that the day sports editor possesses regarding effective recommen-
dation of hiring, discharge, and other supervisory indicia.
'"' Other sections, including Style, Sports, Financial, and The Maga-
zine, employ editors who do their own makeup and layout.
er concedes that the layout functions of these edi-
tors are not supervisory or managerial in nature,
but asserts that other responsibilities of each of the
editors under consideration warrant their exclusion
from the unit.
The news editor, Robert Price, works from 2:30
p.m. to midnight. He and the AME attend the
daily news conferences at which the placement and
play of stories is decided. As stories develop the
AME and Price determine the work of the material
to be published and select the stories for placement.
Price then manages the production process. AME
Cason testified that Price was involved in the
recent hires of the two makeup editors. Cason dis-
cussed the vacancies which occurred in 1977 with
Price. They decided to fly an applicant, Ross, in
from Minneapolis. Cason and Price, and several
other news desk editors, interviewed this applicant,
as well as other applicants. Both Cason and Price
recommended to executive editor Bradlee that
Ross be hired. Bradlee interviewed Ross and she
was hired. Price also interviewed and made a rec-
ommendation on Jackson, who was hired as the
second makeup editor. Price is the only editor be-
sides Cason who can authorize compensatory time
off. He also substitutes for the AME during the lat-
ter's absence, including the 2 days a week Cason
does not work.
Based on the foregoing, including the uncontro-
verted evidence of Price's involvement in the hirng
of new personnel, we conclude that the news
editor is a supervisor and must be excluded from
the unit.
The production editor, James Roseberry, works
from 10:30 a.m. to 7 p.m. Essentially, Roseberry is
the liasion between the news and production de-
partments. Roseberry's responsibilities include deal-
ing with managers and supervisors in bothi depart-
ments to ensure proper production of the newspa-
per. Thus, Roseberry arranges for adequate staffing
in the composing department by informing the su-
pervisors there of the pending contents of the
pages. Roseberry also is in charge of ensuring pro-
duction of any special sections the newspaper in-
tends to include in an edition. In addition to those
duties, Roseberry is also a representative on the
Employer's quality control committee, which is de-
signed to correct production deficiencies and has
prepared studies and recommendations in that area.
At the time of the hearing, Roseberry was chair-
man of a study project concerning production as-
pects of printing, and served on the automation
projects committee which was concerned with the
Company's transition from hot to cold type.
Contrary to the Employer, we find the evidence
concerning this production editor does not estab-
219
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
lish that the position is supervisory or managerial.
Although Roseberry may give directions to pro-
duction people, such direction is not supervisory
but informative. Roseberry contacts the relevant
managers and supervisors to determine production
levels and informs composing room supervisors of
the staffing requirements. Further, we do not view
Roseberry's participation on the various quality
control and production committees as reflective of
managerial status. These committees are investiga-
tory and informative in nature. Roseberry does not
set management policy or determine, formulate, or
effectuate the Employer's labor relations policy.
We thus decline to exclude this position from the
unit. 159
The swing editor, Robert Crocker, handles the
responsibilities of several other news desk editors
on a rotating basis. When news editor Price is pre-
sent, Crocker lays out the foreign and national sto-
ries in inside pages of the paper's section A.60 In
the AME's or news editor's absence, Crocker as-
sumes their functions in selecting stories for print
and placement and directs the production process.
Cason testified that Crocker was the prime contact
with Jackson, who was hired as a makeup editor.
Crocker was one of the several news desk editors
who interviewed and made a recommendation on
Jackson's hire, but, as noted above, both Cason and
Price interviewed and recommended Jackson to
Bradlee.
Based on the record before us we find no evi-
dence that Crocker, in the course of his duties as
swing editor, possesses or exercises managerial or
supervisory authority. As the Board has stated:
Although concededly a news editor's job re-
quires a high degree of journalistic skill and
experience, we conclude that a news editor's
function is not one that marks him as a man-
agerial employee. In this regard we think it
clear that decisions as to (1) the newsworthi-
ness of a news story, and (2) the actual place-
ment of the story in the news section of the
paper cannot be described as "policy" deci-
sions. Rather, such decisions reflect a purely
journalist judgment as to the probable impor-
tance of a particular story to the paper's read-
ership and a technical judgment as to the best
'59 Bulletin Company, 226 NLRB at 358, relied on by the Employer is
not to the contrary. There, Associate Editor Lewis reported directly to
the editor-publisher or the executive editor. He alone was charged with
revising the metro coverage and for recommending personnel and proce-
dural changes. Lewis also was continually involved in personnel matters,
such as minority recruiting. The Board thus concluded that Lewis was
necessarily involved in the formulation and implementation of the paper's
policy decisions. As detailed above, such is not the case here with Rose-
berry.
"60 The "A" section is the front or first section of the newspaper, in-
cluding the front page.
placement of the story in the news section so
as to insure that the story comes to the read-
er's attention. [Bulletin, 226 NLRB at 359.]
With respect to the supervisory claim, it is clear
that Crocker's authority is both limited and shared.
His substitution for the AME or news editor does
not involve him in substantive personnel decisions
or require the use of independent judgment or dis-
cretion in the exercise of his duties. Nor can
Crocker's participation in the hire of Jackson be
viewed as supervisory in nature. Almost every
news desk editor spoke with or considered the ap-
plication of the makeup editor applicants. Ultimate-
ly, Cason and Price decided whom they wanted to
hire, and they made the effective recommendation
to Bradlee on the hires. Such informal consensus
decisionmaking is more akin to that of skilled
craftsmen passing judgment on the technical merit
of an applicant rather than an effective exercise of
supervisory authority. We therefore decline to ex-
clude the swing editor from the unit.
Barbara Taylor, the chief makeup editor, is the
news desk and news room representative in the
Company's composing room operations. Essential-
ly, Taylor oversees the actual production of the
newspaper, and ensures that the printers follow the
plans set by the editor. She can tell printers what
to do, but, if they refuse, she contacts their supervi-
sors or foremen. Taylor also decides whether a sec-
tion is "good"; i.e., set for printing. In this regard,
she may allow a news item to be placed in the
paper before certifying its readiness for printing. In
line with this responsibility is Taylor's authority to
trim stories as necessary. The chief makeup editor
also prepares the daily index for the section A-I
page. The two makeup editors assist in guiding the
printers, adjusting story length, and ordering new
headlines for revised stories. Taylor, like other edi-
tors in the news room, was involved in the hire of
Ross and Jackson. She was one of the editors who
interviewed Ross, and she participated in an edi-
tor's group discussion on Jackson.
On the basis of this record, we conclude that the
chief makeup editor is not a supervisor. Taylor is
involved in the production process for the news
desk. When dealing with the printers, she contacts
the supervisor or foremen of the printer if he "is
stubborn"; i.e., will not follow her production dir-
ectives. Her participation in the hiring of the
makeup editors was clearly limited and not supervi-
sory in nature.
Also working on the news desk is the late night
editor, Thomas Sherwood. His duties consist of
controlling the changes in content and look of the
newspaper's A-1 section during the few hours
220
THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
prior to final publication. As the various editions of
the paper are printed, Sherwood checks on A-I
stories and other developments. On several occa-
sions, Sherwood decides that a "major tear-up" is
required; i.e., that the front page must be remade
because of significant developments in events. The
late news editor also lays out stories as required
and reads corrected proofs from the composing
room. In addition, Sherwood is the ranking editor
when Cason and Price are at dinner.
The Employer asserts that Sherwood's duties
and responsibilities are managerial and therefore his
interests are sufficiently different from other em-
ployees to require his exclusion. However, unlike
the instance of the Sunday editor in the Peoria
Journal Star,'6 ' and Bulletin Company,16 2 Sher-
wood does not work directly under the executive
editor and is not responsible for every part of the
paper. Nor does he chair meetings involving story
selections or control all story placements. Those
factors were important in finding the editors in
those cases to be managerial employees. In the in-
stant case, we find the late news editor shares simi-
lar working conditions to the other editors on the
news desk who are not managerial employees. Fur-
ther, the daily -hour "substitution" by Sherwood
for Cason and Price during their dinner hour does
not establish supervisory authority, since there is
no showing that Sherwood actually exercises or
possesses any true supervisory responsibilities.
The final position under consideration on the
news desk is that of metro news editor, William D.
Stewart. Stewart's responsibilities include layout,
production, and changes in page I of the Metro
section, and also some of the inside pages. Two
news aides work with Stewart in this process. We
cannot conclude, based on this record, that
Stewart's direction of the news aides is supervisory
in nature, and therefore decline to exclude him
from the unit.1 63
L. Editorial Department
The editorial page editor and a deputy editorial
page editor, both excluded from the unit, are in
charge of the editorial page. The Employer seeks
to exclude the approximately eight writers who
write editorials and occasional columns, edit the
"op-ed" page of the newspaper, edit the letters to
the editor, and prepare graphics. The editorial de-
partment also includes a copy chief, three copy
'1' 117 NLRB 708, 711 (1957).
162 226 NLRB 345. 358-359.
13 The Employer offered little testimony regarding this position, and
argued that the position was similar to others in the department in scope
of responsibilities, and should be excluded on that basis. We do not agree.
editors, and a cartoonist.' 64The Post also seeks to
exclude the copy chief.
The editor and deputy editor of the editorial
page review all editorials written in the depart-
ment. Usually, there is a daily 10 a.m. conference
presided over by these editors, during which the
editors and editorial writers discuss topics for pos-
sible editorials, and the position the newspaper
should take with respect to the issues under consid-
eration. Testimony indicates that these meetings are
collaborative. Each of the editorial writers has a
particular expertise in a certain news area and usu-
ally composes editorials on those topics when they
are discussed on the page.
The editorial writers, in addition to writing the
editorials, edit columns and screen material for pos-
sible inclusion in the newspaper. As noted above,
all editorial material is forwarded to the editors,
who make the final selection concerning the mate-
rial that will be used. However, the record reflects
that once an editorial is prepared, the editors rarely
change the substance of the editorial, although they
may make grammatical and other technical correc-
tions. The record further reflects that when there
are sensitive topics or proposed changes in the
newspaper's editorial stance, the publisher is ad-
vised by the editors of the editorial department's
proposals.
The Employer contends that its editorial writers
should be excluded from the unit because they are
closely aligned with management. In this regard,
the Employer recognizes that the Board tradition-
ally has not found editorial writers to be manageri-
al employees. The Employer maintains, however,
that the duties of its editorial writers are sufficient-
ly different from those considered by the Board in
the past to warrant their exclusion. Alternatively,
the Employer maintains that the Board should rec-
ognize the potential conflict inherent in the job of
editorial writer; in other words, that the Board
should reconsider its holdings in this area.' 6 5 We
do not agree with the Employer that the duties of
its editorial writers differ significantly from the
duties of those editorial writers whom the Board
has found not to be managerial employees in the
past.' 6 6 Since we are not persuaded that we should
I64 The cartoonist is Herbert Block, "Herblock," whose work appears
on the editorial page and whom the Employer does not seek to exclude.
I65 In support of this contention, the Employer relies on Wichita Eagle
and Beacon Publishing Company, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 480 F.2d 52 (10th Cir.
1973), cert. denied 416 U.S. 982 (1974).
66 See Bulletin at 357-358. where the Board found editorial writers
not to be managerial employees where the preparation and direction of
the editorial page was handled by admitted supervisors above the editori-
al writer level, and where "major" proposed editorial topics were cleared
first with the editor-publisher.
221
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
reconsider our decisions in this area, we will not
exclude the editorial writers here.
The Employer asserts that editorial writer John-
son, in addition to her writing duties, is a speechw-
riter for the publisher and thus is a confidential em-
ployee. Testimony by the editorial page editor indi-
cates that Johnson has worked on the preparation
of the publisher's statements concerning labor rela-
tions matters.' 6 7 We agree with the Employer that
an employee who acts in a confidential capacity to
a labor relations policymaker meets the definition
of a confidential employee, and we conclude that
the relationship between the speechwriter and the
publisher is confidential in nature. Accordingly, we
shall exclude Johnson from the unit because of her
position as speechwriter.
The editorial department, like other news depart-
ments, utilizes a copy chief and copy editors to
move written copy. The copy chief, Dave Gunder-
son, along with three full-time and an unspecified
number of part-time copy editors, perform the
copy functions. This group of editorial department
personnel is responsible for copy flow, layout, the
physical makeup of the editorial page, and review
for technical purposes of the editorial and op-ed
page material. Like the other copy chiefs, the copy
chief of the editorial department makes recommen-
dations concerning tryouts by copy editors. How-
ever, as in most other departments, the final deci-
sion on hiring is done by admitted supervisors.
"' These were primarily related to a strike which took place at the
newspaper in 1975.
Consistent with our conclusions with respect to
copy chiefs generally, and based on the facts con-
tained in the record herein, we conclude that the
editorial department copy chief is not a supervisor
within the meaning of the Act.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the collective-bargain-
ing unit of editorial, news, advertising, circulation,
and business departments of The Washington Post
Company, represented by The Washington-Balti-
more Newspaper Guild, Local 35, affiliated with
The Newspaper Guild, AFL-CIO-CLC, be, and it
hereby is, clarified by specifically excluding zone
sales managers, the chain and department store
manager, the commissioned sales manager, the
phone room training manager, the classified sales
manager, the sales development and training man-
ager, the assistant manager of advertising services,
the customer relations manager, home delivery
managers, the assistant public relations manager,
the chief telephone operator, the supervisor of
composing room assistants, the manager of the
food services department, the insurance administra-
tor, the manager of training and development, data
processing managers, research consultants, the na-
tional editor, the deputy national editor, the deputy
metro editor, area editors, the copy chief supervi-
sor, the special projects editor (Style), the deputy
editor (Style), the picture editor, the art director,
the foreign editor, the day sports editor, the night
sports editor, and the news editor.
222