220 N.L.R.B. 234 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

Belleville Typographical Union No. 74

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 12, 1975

220 N.L.R.B. 234 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

234 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Belleville Typographical Union No. 74, affiliated with the International Typographical Union , AFL-CIO' and Belleville News-Democrat , Inc. and St. Louis Web Printing Pressmen and Flymen 's Union, Local No. 38, International Printing Pressmen and Graphic Communications Union , AFL-CIO. Case 14-CD-504 September 12, 1975 tion engaged in the publication of daily newspapers and has an annual gross revenue in excess of $200,000. The Employer subscribes to interstate news services, publishes nationally syndicated features, and advertises nationally sold products. Accordingly, we find, as the parties have stipulated, that the Em- ployer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it will effec- tuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS FANNING AND PENELLO This a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, as amended, following a charge filed by Belleville News-Democrat, Inc., here- in called the Employer or the News-Democrat, alleg- ing that Belleville Typographical Union No. 74, affi- liated with the International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Typographers, had violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act by engaging in certain proscribed conduct having an object of forcing or requiring the Employer to assign certain work to em- ployees represented by it rather than to employees represented by St. Louis Web Printing Pressmen and Flymen's Union, Local No. 38, International Print- ing Pressmen and Graphic Communications Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Pressmen. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Richard C. Cornish on May 6, 1975, at St. Louis, Missouri. All parties appeared at the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to present evidence bearing on the issues. Thereafter, the Employer, the Typographers, and the Pressmen filed 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 rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the briefs and the entire record in this case and hereby makes the following findings: 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Belleville News-Democrat is an Illinois corpora- 1 The names of the parties appear as corrected at the hearing. If. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS The parties stipulated, and we find, that the Ty- pographers and the Pressmen are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE DISPUTE A. The Work in Dispute The work in dispute, as described in the notice of hearing, consists of "the making of plastic plates in connection with the cold type process of printing the Employer's newspaper at its Belleville, Illinois, facili- ty." B. Background and Facts of the Dispute The Typographers and the Pressmen have tradi- tionally represented, in separate units, certain of the employees in the Employer's mechanical depart- ments. Since approximately late 1973 or early 1974, the Employer has utilized a process involving the use of magnesium plates to print the newspaper. Under this process a paper pasteup of the newspaper page is photographed and the resulting negative, after being carefully inspected for quality, is placed on a pre- pared magnesium plate and exposed to a light source which burns an image onto the plate. This plate is then put into an acid bath which etches away the unexposed portions. After being inspected and trim- med, this photoengraved plate is used to make im- pressions on a celluloid mat. The mat, in turn, is shaped into a semicylinder and receives an injection of hot metal to form a semicylindrical plate. It is this plate which is fastened to the press and used to do the actual printing of the newspaper page. Under the above-described process, employees represented by the Typographers prepared the nega- tives, etched and trimmed the magnesium plates, and rolled the mats. Employees represented by the Press- men backed the mats, dried them, put them into an apparatus called a former to curve them, and cast the metal press plates. 220 NLRB No. 35 BELLEVILLE TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 74 In 1974, the Employer decided to convert its oper- ation to the new NAPP direct printing process. Un- der this new process, a pasteup is photographed and a negative made in the same manner as in the prepa- ration of a magnesium plate. The negative, however, instead of being used to burn an image onto a mag- nesium plate, is placed in an exposure unit in contact with a prephotosensitized photopolymer plate and exposed to an ultraviolet light source. After the plate is exposed and inspected it is placed in a washout unit where water is used instead of acid to etch away the unexposed portion. This plate, which is thinner and more flexible than the magnesium plate, may then be curved to fit directly on a press and used for the printing of a newspaper page, thereby eliminating the necessity for mats and semicylindrical cast plates. The Employer intended to begin using the NAPP process on or about May 8, 1975. In preparation for the conversion to the new process, the Employer as- signed the making of the negatives and plates to em- ployees represented by the Typographers and the trimming, punching, and bending of the finished plate to employees represented by the Pressmen. Pressmen , however, contended that the employees it represented should also perform the camera and platemaking work. In late October or early November 1974, at a grievance meeting attended by representatives of the Employer and the Pressmen an official of the latter stated that it was claiming jurisdiction over the mak- ing of plastic plates. Thereafter, at a meeting with representatives of the Typographers in February 1975, the Employer's representatives were told by Wilmer Bultmann, the chapel chairman of the Ty- pographers, that if the disputed work were not as- signed to employees represented by the Typogra- phers, the latter would go on strike. By letter dated February 19, 1975, the Employer's publisher and president, John E. Shuff, Jr., was advised by the Ty- pographers that the Belleville Typographical Union No. 74 re- serves to itself such course of action, including appropriate job action and, if necessary, strike activity, as it may deem advisable to protect its work jurisdiction under the terms of the contract between us. Thereafter, at a negotiating session between the Employer and the Pressmen, the former was told by representatives of the Pressmen that if employees represented by the Pressmen were not assigned the disputed work that labor organization would strike the Employer. On February 24, 1975, the Employer filed the instant charge alleging that the Typogra- 235 phers, by threatening to strike for the stated object, violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. C. Contentions of the Parties Pressmen takes no position as to whether or not there was reasonable cause to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated. On the merits, Press- men contends that the work in dispute 2 should be assigned to the employees whom it represents on the basis of its contention that the NAPP plate is a sub- stitute for the cast press plate traditionally made by pressmen, and the possible loss of jobs in the Press- men unit if the work is assigned to employees repre- sented by the Typographers. The Employer contends that there is reasonable cause to believe the Typographers violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) by threatening to strike. With respect to the merits of the dispute, the Employer contends the work should be awarded to employees represented by the Typographers on the basis of their skills and training, efficiency of operation, industrial practice, and the collective-bargaining agreement between the Typographers and the Employer. Typographers agrees with the Employer's position on the merits. D. Applicability of the Statute Before the Board may proceed to a determination of a dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, it must be satisfied that (1) there is reasonable cause to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act has been violated, and (2) there is no agreed-upon method for the voluntary adjustment of the dispute. As to (1) above, the record establishes that by let- ter dated February 19, 1975, the Typographers threatened to strike if the disputed work were not assigned to the employees it represents. Accordingly, we find that reasonable cause exists to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act has been' violated. As to (2) above, the record contains no evidence that an agreed-upon method exists for the voluntary adjustment of the dispute. Accordingly, we find that dispute is properly before the Board for determina- tion under Section 10(k) of the Act. E. Merits of the Dispute Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to make an affirmative award of disputed work after 2 While the Pressmen claim jurisdiction over the entire platemaking pro- cess, counsel for the Pressmen indicated, at the hearing , that Pressmen would relinquish the camera work and making of the negative to employees represented by the Typographers 236 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD giving due consideration to various relevant factors, including the following: 1. Certification and collective-bargaining' agreements It does not appear from the record that either la- bor organization has been certified by the Board as exclusive representative of any of the Employer's em- ployees. However, Typographers contends that the disputed work should be awarded to employees rep- resented by it on the basis of article I, section 3, of its collective-bargaining agreement with the Employer. That section provides , in pertinent part: Jurisdiction of the Union begins with the mark- up of copy and continues until the material is ready for the printing press (but excludes proof- reading), and the appropriate collective-bargain- ing unit consists of all employees performing any such work. The Employer' s collective -bargaining agreement with the Pressmen does not contain a jurisdictional provision . Inasmuch as the collective-bargaining agreement between the Typographers and the Em- ployer, although not specifically covering the work in dispute, could reasonably be said to include plate- making, while the contract between the Employer and the Pressmen is silent on this issue , we find that this factor tends to favor an award of the disputed work to employees represented by the Typographers. 2. Employer and area practice Because the Employer had not yet utilized the NAPP platemaking equipment as of the date of the hearing herein , we find that Employer practice with respect to direct printing is not a factor in the deter- mination of the dispute. With respect to industry and area practice , the Ty- pographers introduced evidence that at the Granite City Press Record , the Collinsville Herald , and the Peoria Journal Star, all of which are located within Illinois , both camera work and platemaking work are performed by employees represented by locals affili- ated with the International Typographical Union. The Pressmen introduced evidence that at certain commercial printing plants where plastic plates are used , employees represented by locals who are affili- ated with the International Printing Pressmen and Graphic Communications Union , AFL-CIO, per- form the platemaking work . However , the Pressmen did not introduce any evidence that pressmen per- formed platemaking work at newspapers in the Belle- ville area. Accordingly, we find that the factor of area practice tends to favor award of the disputed work to employees represented by the Typographers. 3. Skills, efficiency, and economy The Employer's production manager , Harold Mc- Michael, testified that, because camera work is an integral part of the NAPP process, the Employer as- signed the disputed work to typographers whose spe- cial skills and experience in operating the camera and producing negatives best qualified them to make the NAPP plates. Pressmen contends, however, that no special skills are required to perform the actual platemaking and that therefore this work, if not both the platemaking and camera work, should be award- ed to employees represented by the Pressmen. How- ever, according to the uncontradicted testimony of McMichael, the NAPP negative and plate must be critically examined at every stage in the production process and typographers have the skills and experi- ence to perform such inspections while pressmen do not. Accordingly, McMichael testified, it is more effi- cient and economical for the same employees to per- form both camera work and the attendant platemak- ing functions. In view of these considerations, we find that the factors of skill, efficiency, and economy favor an award of the disputed work to employees represented by the Typographers. 4. Effect on employment The record indicates that neither group of employ- ees will lose employment if the work in dispute is awarded to the other group. Pressmen contends that, inasmuch as 20 percent of the work of the employees in the unit it represents consisted of making cast printing plates, there will be a serious adverse impact on employment in that unit if the disputed work is awarded to employees represented by the Typogra- phers. In support of this contention, the record indi- cates that when the current negotiations for a new collective-bargaining agreement between the Press- men and the Employer commenced, the Employer attempted to negotiate a reduction in the size of the unit from five to four employees. However, the Em- ployer has withdrawn this demand and now contends that there will be no loss of employment in the Press- men unit if the work in dispute is awarded to em- ployees represented by the Typographers. Accord- ingly, we find that this factor does not tend to favor awarding the work in dispute to either group of em- ployees rather than the other. BELLEVILLE TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 74 237 Conclusion Upon the record as a whole, and after full consid- eration of all relevant factors involved, we conclude that the employees of the Belleville News-Democrat, Inc., who are represented by the Typographers are entitled to perform the work in dispute. We reach this conclusion on the basis of area practice, the fact that such an assignment will result in greater efficien- cy and economy of operation, and the collective-bar- gaining agreement between the Typographers and the Employer. We further find that the employees represented by the Typographers possess the requi- site skills and experience to perform the work. Ac- cordingly, we shall determine the dispute before us by awarding the disputed work at the Employer's publishing plant in Belleville , Illinois, to the Employer's employees represented by the Typogra- phers but not to the Union or its members, DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the foregoing findings and the entire record in this pro- ceeding, the National Labor Relations Board hereby makes the following Determination of Dispute: Employees of the Belleville News-Democrat, Inc., Belleville, Illinois, who are represented by Belleville Typographical Union No. 74, affiliated with the In- ternational Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, are en- titled to perform the making of plastic plates in con- nection with the cold type process of printing at the Belleville News-Democrat, Inc.'s Belleville, Illinois, printing plant.