W. F. Hall Printing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 25, 1945

63 N.L.R.B. 532 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of W. F. HALL PRINTING COMPANY and CHICAGO PRINT-
ING PRESSMEN 'S UNION No . 3, AND FRANKLIN UNION No.4, AFFILIATED
WITH THE INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN & ASSISTANTS' UNION
OF NORTH AMERICA , A. F. L.
Case No. 13-B-3006.-Decided August 5, 1945
Messrs . Robert J. Appel, Arthur N. Knel, and Adam Moses, of
Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Messrs. Joseph J. Seppi and N. M. Di Pietre, of Chicago, Ill.,
for the Pressmen.
Mr. James F. Doyle, of Chicago, Ill., for Franklin.
Miss Ruth E. Blie field, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Chicago Printing Pressmen's Union
No. 3, and Franklin Union No. 4, both affiliated with the International
Printing Pressmen and Assistant's Union of North America, A. F. L.,
herein separately called the Pressmen, and Franklin, and collectively
referred to as the Unions, alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of W. F.
Hall Printing Company, Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Com-
pany, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appro-
priate hearing upon due notice before Robert T. Drake, Trial Ex-
aminer. Said hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois on May 10, 1945.
The Company, the Pressmen, and Franklin appeared and partici-
pated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear-
ing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties
were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. The Com-
pany's request for rehearing and oral argument is hereby denied.
63 N. L. R. B., No. 83.
532
W. F. HALL PRINTING COMPANY 533
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
W. F. Hall Printing Company, an Illinois corporation, is engaged
at its plant in Chicago, Illinois, in the business of printing, binding,
and shipping magazines, catalogues, and other printed matter. Dur-
ing the fiscal year ending March 31, 1945, the Company purchased
for use in its Chicago plant material amounting to approximately
$2,000,000, in value, approximately 50 percent of which was shipped
to it from points outside the State of Illinois. During the same
period, the Company's receipts from the sale of products manufactured
at its Chicago plant, were in excess of $8,000,000, of which more than
75 percent represented products sold and transported to purchasers
outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Chicago Printing Pressmen's Union No. 3 and Franklin Union
No. 4, both locals of International Printing Pressmen and Assist-
ants' Union of North America, affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor , are labor organizations admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On April 2, 1945, the Unions requested the Company to recognize
them as the bargaining agent for certain of the Company's employees.
The Company refused to accord them such recognition.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Unions represent a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
' The Field Examiner reported that the Unions submitted 173 authorization cards and
certified union designations , that the names of 166 persons appearing on the cards were
listed on the Company s pay roll which contained the names of 366 employees in the appro-
priate unit ; and that the cards were dated as follows :
June 1944 , 1 October 1944, 14 January 1945, 9 April 1945, 26
July 1944, 3 November 1 944, 7 , February 1945, 59
August 1944 , 2 December 1944, 1 March 1945, 44
The Company objected to the admission in evidence of the Report of Investigation of
Contending Labor Organizations because there was no break -down to show the number
of cards presented by each of the Unions . The Trial Examiner admitted the exhibit In
evidence over this objection.
We have frequently held that the appraisal of a union ' s evidence of representation is a
discretionary matter with the Board and that the Company is not prejudiced legally by
the Board 's consideration of authorization cards in satisfying its own administrative re-
quirements . We are satisfied that, where a joint petition is filed, as in the present case,
534 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Unions seek a unit consisting of all pressmen employed by the
Company in the Rotary, Cylinder, and McKee pressrooms, the Job
Press Department, and the Overlay Department, including all jour-
neymen, apprentice journeymen, helpers, apprentice helpers, line fore-
men, press runner, and superintendent in the rotary pressroom; all
foremen, working foremen overlay men, journeymen and foremen in
the job press department; and all foremen, working foremen overlay
men, journeymen overlay men, apprentice overlay men, highlite drop
card washer, highlite droppers, top puller and etchers in the overlay
department; but excluding miscellaneous employees, stock handler
and wash-up employee in the cylinder and McKee pressroom; miscel-
laneous employees, packer girls, packer boys, wash-up and roller
resurfacer in the rotary pressroom, the miscellaneous employee in
the job press department, and O. K. men and clericals in the overlay
department. The Company, while it agrees generally with the Unions
as to the composition of the unit, contends that there should be two
units designated, consisting of those employees falling within the
respective jurisdictions of the unions involved herein 2
The Company, in support of its position that there should be two
units, makes sundry contentions which we construe as opposing Board
certification of several unions as a single bargaining representative.
We have heretofore considered similar or related arguments and have
held that several unions may be jointly certified,s and, in fact, have in
the past accepted petitions filed by two or more unions jointly in this
industry and have directed elections in a single unit on the basis of
such joint petitions. Nor are we able to agree with the Company's
further contention that the respective groups falling within the juris-
diction of Franklin and the Pressmen are "essentially and inherently
different." The Board has in many prior cases found that pressmen
the Board 's administrative requirements are met by a combined showing of the joint peti-
tioners which is substantial . Accordingly , the ruling of the Trial Examiner is hereby
upheld.
2 The jurisdiction of the Pressmen extends to all journeymen pressmen , apprentice
pressmen , press runners, foldermen , foremen and assistant foremen supervising these classi-
fications, superintendents , and assistant superintendents.
The jurisdiction of Franklin extends to all helpers , consisting of automatic feeder
operator , rollmen, and oilers, job press helpers, make -ready men and pre-make -ready men.
8 See Matter of R. R . Donnelly & Sons Company, 59 N. L. R. B . 122; Matter of John
Dickinson Schneider , et al, 59 N. L . R. B. 1133 ; Matter of H. L. Ruggles & Company, 58
N. L. R. B . 308; Matter of Rapinwas Paper Company, 56 N. L R B. 1774 ; Matter of A. S.
Abell Company , 27 N. L. R. B. 776. See also Matter of Rudolf Orthwine Corporation, 60
N. L. R. B. 447.
W. F. HALL PRINTING COMPANY 535
and assistant pressmen or helpers together constitute an appropriate
unit.4 The Company asserts further that, although it has been the
practice of the Unions to negotiate jointly with employers, they have
executed separate contracts, and it impliedly argues that the practice
of executing separate contracts militates against the appropriateness
of a single unit. Irrespective of the practice of the Unions with other
employers we find that argument not to be controlling here. We as-
sume that the Unions do not contemplate that the Company be re-
quired to bargain on the basis of any unit other than the one which may
be determined appropriate in this proceeding. If the Unions win the
election hereinafter directed in the appropriate unit and are certified
as exclusive bargaining representative, the Company will have the
right to insist on dealing directly with the Unions as joint representa-
tive of the employees in that single unit.'
The record establishes that the employees here involved perform
the functions typical of their trade, and apparently are not confined
to a single press room or department, but. are located throughout
several departments of the plant, which are closely coordinated.
Under all the circumstances, and on the basis of the entire record, we
are of the opinion that the employees sought by the Union, although
of varying levels of skill in the same craft, constitute an identifiable,
homogeneous group performing interrelated functions and may act
together for the purposes of collective bargaining.
We find that all pressmen employed by the Company in the rotary,
cylinder and McKee pressrooms, the job press department, and the
overlay department, including all journeymen, apprentice journey-
men, helpers, apprentice helpers, line foremen, press runner, and super-
intendent in the rotary pressroom; and all foremen, working foremen
overlay men, journeymen and foremen in the job press department;
and all foremen, working foremen overlay men, journeymen overlay
men, apprentice overlay men, highlite drop card washer, highlite
droppers, top puller and etchers in the overlay department; but ex-
cluding miscellaneous employees, stock handler and wash-up employee
in the cylinder and McKee pressroom, miscellaneous employees, packer
girls, packer boys, wash-up and roller resurfacer in the rotary press-
room, the miscellaneous employee in the job press departments and
0. K. men and clericals in the overlay department, constitute an
appropriate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.'
See footnote 3, supra.
° See Matter of Fairmont Creamery Company , 61 N L R. B. 1311.
Alphonse Conforte , who was stipulated to be a clerical employee.
7 It was agreed by the parties that the classification "journeymen" as used herein refers
to "journeymen pressman," and the term "helper" includes automatic and feeder operators,
rollmen and oilers, job press helpers , make-ready and pre -make-ready men, and cylinder
feeders. We hereby adopt the agreement of the parties.
536 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Company requests that , in any election to be directed , employees
in the armed services or on leave of absence be permitted to vote in
person or by mail. In accordance with our policy , as set forth in
Matter of Mine Safety Appliance Company's persons in the armed
forces shall be permitted to vote only if they present themselves in
person at the polls. As to those on leave of absence for other reasons,
we shall likewise make no provision for their voting by mail , but shall
provide that such of them as did not work during the pay-roll period
selected , because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off,
may vote if they present themselves in person at the polls.
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the direc-
tion s
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue bf and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with W. F. Hall Print-
ing Company, Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be
conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from
the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as
agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article
III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the
employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who
were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the
date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during
the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tempo-
rarily laid off and including employees in the armed forces of the
United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but
excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for
8 55 N L. R B 1190.
The request of the Unions to appear on the ballot as Chicago Printing Pressmen's Union
No. 3, and Franklin Union No. 4, I. P. P . & A. U. of N. A., A. F. of L. Is hereby left to the
discretion of the Regional Director.
W. F. HALL PRINTING COMPANY 537
cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the
election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented
jointly by Chicago Printing Pressmen's Union No. 3, and Franklin
Union No. 4, affiliated with the International Printing Pressmen &
Assistants' Union of North America, A. F. L., for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.