WORLD COLOR (USA) CORP., a wholly-owned subsidiary of QUAD GRAPHICS, INC.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 15, 2018

32-CA-062242 (N.L.R.B. Nov. 15, 2018)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WORLD COLOR (USA) CORP.,
A WHOLLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF
QUAD GRAPHICS, INC.
and Case 32-CA-062242
32-CA-063140
GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS
CONFERENCE OF THE
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD
OF TEAMSTERS, LOCAL 715-C
NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE
On February 12, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board issued a Decision and
Order affirming Administrative Law Judge William Nelson Cates’ finding that the
Respondent’s hat policy, which prohibits its employees from wearing any baseball caps
other than company caps, violates Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. 360 NLRB 227. The
Board found the policy “overbroad” and stated that it was “undisputed that the policy on
its face prohibits employees from engaging in the protected activity of wearing caps
bearing union insignia.” Id. at 227 fn. 1. The Respondent filed a petition for review with
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and the Board
filed a cross-application for enforcement. On January 16, 2015, the court granted the
petition for review and remanded the case to the Board for reconsideration of its
decision.1 The court recited the test set forth in Lutheran Heritage Village-Livonia, 343
NLRB 646 (2004), and found that the Board had inappropriately ended its analysis
without considering the second step of that test, which includes consideration of
whether employees would “reasonably construe” the language of a challenged policy to

1 World Color (USA) Corp. v. NLRB, 776 F.3d 17 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
prohibit Section 7 activity. Id. at 647. Recently, the Board overruled the Lutheran
Heritage “reasonably construe” test and announced a new standard that applies
retroactively to all pending cases. The Boeing Co., 365 NLRB No. 154, slip op. at 14-17
(2017).
Having duly considered the matter,
NOTICE IS GIVEN that cause be shown, in writing, filed with the Board in
Washington, D.C., on or before November 29, 2018. (with affidavit of service on the
parties to this proceeding), why this case should not be remanded to the administrative
law judge for further proceedings consistent with the Board’s decision in Boeing,
including reopening the record if necessary. Any briefs or statements in support of the
motion shall be filed on the same date.
Dated, Washington, D.C. November 15, 2018.
By direction of the Board:
Roxanne Rothschild
Acting Executive Secretary