Jackson Daily News

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 26, 1950

90 N.L.R.B. 565 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter Of JACKSON DAILY NEws, RESPONDENT and CALEB.
DORTCII, CO-RESPONDENT and INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN
ASSISTANTS' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, JACKSON PRINTING PRESS-
MEN AND ASSISTANTS' LOCAL 215, A. F. L.
Case No. 15-CA-193.-Decided Jwn,e 2611950
DECISION AND ORDER
On February 15, 1950, Trial Examiner Thomas S. Wilson issued his
Intermediate Report in the above - entitled proceeding , finding that
the Respondent and Co-respondent had engaged in and were engaging
in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that they cease and
desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the
copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto . Thereafter, the
Respondent and Co-respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate
Report and a supporting brief, and the General Counsel filed a brief.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and
finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed . The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the
exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby
adopts the findings , conclusions , and recommendations of the Trial
Examiner , with the following additions and modifications :
1. We agree with the Trial Examiner that Dortch made the coercive
statements set forth in the Intermediate Report, and that, in making
such statements , Dortch directly or indirectly acted as the agent of the
Respondent , Jackson Daily News , so as to make that Respondent re-
sponsible for such statements . Like the Examiner , we find, also, that,
by reason of such agency , Dortch was himself an Employer, for the
purposes of this case, within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act,2
and, as such , we shall order him as well as the Respondent to cease and
desist from continuing this unlawful conduct.3
I Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and
Members Houston and Styles].
2 Section 2 (2) defines the term "employer" as including "any person acting as an agent
of an employer , directly or indirectly. . . .
I In the discussion under the heading of "Johnson 's knowledge of the Union 's activity,"
the Examiner refers to Dortch as one "who had no ostensible connection with the Re-
90 NLRB No. 69.
565
566 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. We agree with the Trial Examiner's finding that Johnson, the
Respondent's general manager, knew of the Union' s organizational
campaign before June 20, 1949, when the pressroom employees-re-
ceived a wage increase, and that such increase violated Section 8 (a)
(1) of the Act. In addition to the reasons advanced by the Trial
Examiner for finding that Johnson had such knowledge, we rely on
the evidence, which is not disputed in the record, that on June 18 or.
19 Dortch knew of the Union's campaign to organize the pressroom
employees. As Dortch was at that time the Respondent's agent,, his
knowledge is chargeable to the Respondent as a matter of law.4
3. Like the Examiner, we find that Johnnie V. Ghettie was not, in
fact, a supervisor at the time of his discharge, notwithstanding that
he had at that time the job title of assistant foreman, and, in the fore-
man's absence, would have certain duties in addition to his ordinary
nonsupervisory duties as assistant foreman. Insofar as appears from
the record, these additional duties consisted chiefly in the preparation
of time cards and stock reports. On the one occasion when Ghettie
was left "in charge of" the pressroom after his promotion, the fore-
man, Robbins, told Ghettie, "If anything happens, you know where to
get in touch with me." This instruction was, in our opinion, incom-
patible with a delegation to Ghettie of authority to use independent
judgement, which authority is postulated by the Act as a basic quali-
fication of a "supervisor." 5 Moreover, it is not clear from the record
that the occasion for Ghetti's exercise of any part of the foreman's
authority were to be other than sporadic in nature. Under these cir-
cumstances, and upon the entire record, we find that at the time of his
discharge Ghettie was not a supervisor within the meaning of the
Act.'
As Ghettie was not a supervisor, and as his discharge was admittedly
for union activities, we find, in agreement with the Trial Examiner,
that Ghettie's discharge violated Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the
Act. In view of this finding, it is not necessary in our opinion to
spondent" Ave construe this statement as meaning only that to the general public Dortch
had no ostensible connection with the Respondent , and as , therefore , not inconsistent with
the Examiner 's finding elsewhere in the Report that from the standpoint of the pressroom
employees Dortch was an "apparent agent" of the Respondent , 1. e., had apparent authority
to speak for the Respondent on matters pertaining to the Respondent 's labor relations.
4 See Alabama Marble Company, 83 NLRB 1047; 3 Corp. Jur . Secundum , sec. 262.
Moreover , where , as in this case, the Union 's organizational activities occur in a relatively
small plant , the Board may infer that such activities have come to the attention of man-
agement. N. L. R. B. v. Abbott Worsted Mills, Inc., 127 F. 2d 438, 440 (C. A. 1).
5 Section 2 (11) of the Act defines a "supervisor " as "any individual having authority in
the interest of the employer , to hire , transfer , suspend . . . other employees , or responsibly
to direct them, or to adjust their grievances , or effectively 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 ." [ Emphasis added.]
0 See Twentieth Century-For Film Corp., 89 NLRB 109 ; East Tennessee Packing Co.,
89 NLRB 535 ; Lake Superior District Power Co., 87 NLRB 40.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 567
determine whether Ghettie's promotion to the position of assistant
foreman on June 20, 1949, likewise violated the Act, and we do not pass
upon this question.
The Remedy
As recommended by the Trial Examiner, we shall order the Re-
spondent to offer Johnnie V. Ghettie, Jr., reinstatement with back pay
from the date of his discharge. Since the issuance of the Trial Ex-
aminer's Intermediate Report, however, the Board has adopted a
method of computing back pay different from that prescribed by the
Trial Examiner.' Consistent with the, new policy we shall order that
the loss of pay be computed on the basis of each separate calendar
quarter or portion thereof during the period from the Respondent's
discriminatory action to the date of a proper offer of reinstatement.
The quarterly periods, hereinafter called "quarters," shall begin with
the first day of January, April, July, and October. Loss of pay shall
.be determined by deducting from a sum equal to that which this em-
ployee would normally have earned for each quarter or portion thereof,
his net earnings,8 if any, in other employment during that period.
Earnings in one particular quarter shall have no effect upon the, back-
pay liability for any other quarter.
We shall also order the Respondent to make available to the Board
upon request payroll and other records to facilitate the checking
of the amount of back pay due.5
ORDER
Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that :
A. The Respondent, Jackson Daily News, and its officers, agents,
successors, and assigns shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Discouraging membership in International Printing Pressmen
and Assistants' Union of North America, Jackson Printing Pressmen
& Assistants' Local 215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization of
its employees, by discharging, or discriminating in any other manner
7 F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289.
8 By "net earnings" is meant earnings less expenses, such as for transportation, room, and
board, incurred by an employee in connection with obtaining work and working elsewhere,
which would not have been incurred but for the unlawful discrimination, and the conse-
quent necessity of his seeking employment elsewhere. Crossett Lumber Company,
8 NLRB 440. Monies received for work performed upon Federal, State, county, municipal,
or other work-relief projects shall be considered earnings . Republic Steel Corporation v.
N. L. R. B., 311 U. S. 7.
, F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289.
568 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
in regard to the hire, tenure of employment, or any term or condition
of employment of any of its employees ;
(b) Urging, persuading, or warning its employees by threats of
reprisal or force or promise of benefit to refrain from assisting, or
becoming or remaining members of, the afore-named Union or from
engaging in concerted activities; questioning its employees concerning
their membership in, and activities on behalf of the afore-named Union
through employment application forms or otherwise; threatening its
employees with loss of employment should they assist, or become or
remain members of, the afore-named Union or should they engage in
concerted activity ; threatening to close its operations in order to
discourage membership in the afore-named Union; or in any other
manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the
exercise of the right to self-organization, to form, join or assist labor
organizations , including International Printing Pressmen & Assist-
ants' Union of North America, Jackson Printing Pressmen and
Assistants'Local 215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization, to
bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and
to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bar-
gainkig or other mutual aid or-protection, or to refrain from any or
all such activities, except to the extent that such right may be affected
by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a
condition of employment as authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Offer to Johnnie V. Ghettie, Jr., immediate and full. reinstate-
ment to his former or a substantially equivalent position as assistant
foreman of the pressroom without prejudice to his seniority or other
rights and privileges, and make Min whole, in the manner set forth
in the section-entitled "The Remedy" for any loss of pay which he
may have suffered by reason of the Respondent's discrimination
against him ;
(b) Upon request, make available to the Board or its agents, for
examination and copying, all payroll records, social security payment
records, time cards, personnel records and reports, and all other rec-
ords necessary to analyze; the amounts of back pay due and the right
of reinstatement under the terms of this Order.
(c) Post in its pressroom and offices in Jackson, Mississippi, copies
of the notice attached hereto marked Appendix A.10 Copies of said
notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Fifteenth
Region, shall, after being duly executed by the Respondent's repre-
10 In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of Appeals,
there shall he inserted before the words, "A Decision and Order ," the words , "A Decree of
the United States Court of Appeals enforcing."
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 569
sentative and by Co-respondent Dortch, be posted by the Respondent
immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it for a period
of at least sixty (60) consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous
places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily
posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to insure
that such notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other
material ; and
(d) Notify the Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region in
writing, within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what steps
the Respondent has taken to comply herewith.
B. The Co-respondent Caleb Dortch and his agents and representa-
tives shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
In any manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing the em-
ployees of the Respondent Jackson Daily News in the exercise of
their right to self-organization, to form, join or assist labor organiza-
tions, including International Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Union
of North America, Jackson Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Local
215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization, to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in con-
certed activities, for the purposes of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection or to refrain from any or all of such activi-
ties, except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agree-
ment requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of
employment as authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Immediately upon receipt of copies of the notice referred to
in paragraph 2 (b) of part .1 of this Order, above, execute and deliver
the same to the Respondent for posting in accordance with the provi-
sions of said paragraph 2 (b,) ; and
(b) Notify the Regional. Director for the Fifteenth Region in
writing, within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what
steps the Co-respondent has taken to comply herewith.,
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO ALL Emrf,oS nis
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations
Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify our employees that :
WE WILL NOT urge, persuade, or warn our employees by threats
of reprisal or promise of benefit to refrain from assisting, or be-
570 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
coming or remaining members of, INTERNATON AL PRINTING
PRESSMEN & ASSISTANTS' UNION of NORTH AMERICA, JACKSON
PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' LOCAL 215, A. F. L., or any
other labor organization.
THE JACKSON DAILY NEWS WILL NOT question its employees con-
cerning their membership in any labor organization through em-
ployment application forms or otherwise.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with, restrain, or
coerce employees of the Jackson Daily News in the exercise of
their right to self-organization, to form labor organizations, to
join Or assist INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN & ASSISTANTS'
UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, JACKSON PRINTING PRESSMEN AND
ASSISTANTS' LOCAL 215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization,
to bargain collectively through representatives of their own
choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to
refrain from any or all of such activities, except to the extent
that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring mean-
bership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as
authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
THE JACKSON DAILY NEWS WILL OFFER to Johnnie V. Ghettie,
Jr., immediate and full reinstatement to his former or substanti-
ally equivalent position without prejudice to any seniority or other
rights and privileges enjoyed and make him whole for any loss
of pay suffered as a result of the discrimination against him.
All employees of the Jackson Daily News are free to become or re-
main members of the above-named union or any other labor organiza-
tion. The Jackson Daily News Will not discriminate in regard to hire,
or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment
against any employee because of membership in or activity on behalf
of any such labor organization.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS,
Employer.
Dated-------------------- By -------------------------=------
(Representative) (Title)
Dated-------------------- CALEB DoRTCH, Co-respondent.
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
INTERMEDIATE REPORT -
Victor H. Hess, Jr., Esq., and R. Boyd Starke, Esq., for the General Counsel.
H. V. Watkins, Esq., and T. H. Watkins, Esq., and Messrs. Walter G. Johnson,
Jr. and Gordon Meador, of,Jackson, Miss., for the Respondent.
Ernest Shelton , Esq., of Jackson, Miss., for the Co-respondent.
Mr. Warren W. McCann, of Atlanta , Ga., for the Union.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
571
Upon amended charges duly filed on September 26, 1949, by Jackson Printing
Pressmen and Assistants ' Local 215 , affiliated with International Printing Press-
men & Assistants ' Union of. North America , A. F. L., hereinafter called the Union,
the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, herein respectively
called the General Counsel and the Board,' by the Regional Director for the
Fifteenth Region, ( New Orleans , Louisiana ), issued a complaint dated September
27, 1949 , alleging that Jackson Daily News, hereinafter referred to as either the
Respondent and/or the News, and Caleb Dortch, hereinafter called the Co-
respondent and Dortch , respectively , had engaged , and were engaging , in unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) (3)
and Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 61
Stat . 136, hereinafter called the Act. Copies of the complaint and amended
charge , together with a notice of hearing thereon, were duly served upon the
Respondent , Dortch, and the Union.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleged that: (1)
On or about June 17, 1949 , the Respondent , through its officers and agents in-
cluding the Co-respondent , Caleb Dortch , interfered with , restrained , and coerced
its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.by
various enumerated activities ; and (2 ) the Respondent , on or about June 27, 1949,
changed the job title of employee Johnnie V . Ghettie, Jr., and on July 5, 1949,
discharged said employee because of his membership in and activities on behalf
of the Union in order to discourage union membership and activity on the
part of its other employees.
On October 10, 1949, the Respondent and Co-respondent filed a joint answer
admitting various factual allegations contained in the complaint but denying
the commission of any unfair labor practice.
Pursuant to notice , a hearing was held in Jackson, Mississippi , from October
11 through October 18, 1949, before the undersigned , the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Chief Trial Examiner . The General Counsel, the Respondent,
Co-respondent Dortch, and the Union were represented at the hearing. All
parties participated in the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross -examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence bearing on
the issues . At the conclusion of the hearing , the Respondent and Co-respondent
each moved to dismiss the complaint as to them on the ground of the failure of
proof. This motion was taken under advisement and is hereby denied . There-
after, briefs were received from the General Counsel, the Respondent , and the
Co-respondent.
Upon the entire record in the case, and from his observation of. the witnesses,
the undersigned makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESSES OF THE RESPONDENT AND CO-RESPONDENT
The Respondent, Jackson Daily News, is a Division of Mississippi Publishers
Corporation, a corporation organized under the State of Delaware and authorized
to do business in the State of Mississippi, and is engaged in publishing a news-
paper in Jackson, Mississippi.
' The term General Counsel includes also counsel for the General Counsel appearing at
the hearing.
572 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
At its plant and office at. Jackson, Mississippi, the Respondent publishes a news-
paper called the Jackson Daily News, daily and Sunday, with a combined circula-
tion of approximately 38,000. The Respondent carries local and national adver-
tising and receives and publishes news items of the United Press, Associated Press,
and National Editorial Association. During the 12-month period ending June 30,
1949, the Respondent purchased raw materials of a value in excess of $200,000,
'of which approximately 90 percent was received from outside the State of
Mississippi. During this same period, the Respondent sold newspapers and ad-
vertising of a value in excess of $300,000, approximately IS percent of which was
:sold outside the State of Mississippi.
The Co-respondent, Caleb Dortch, an individual residing in Jackson, Mississippi,
is the owner and proprietor of the Mississippi Engraving Company, a concern
which makes and sells engravings to various newspaper and printing establish-
ments, doing a gross business of approximately $100,000 per year of which
approximately 10 percent constituted sales to the Respondent?
The Respondent and Co-respondent admit that the Respondent is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the Act and the undersigned so finds.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Jackson Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Local 215, affiliated with the Inter-
national Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Union of North America, A. F. L., is a
labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Respondent.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Chronology of facts
The main actions in the instant case cover a very short span of time.
On June 13, 1949, the Respondent made out its last salary check payable to
Caleb Dortch in the suns of $2.' When this check was delivered to Dortch is not
shown in this record.
On June 10, 1949, one Warren W. McCann walked into the Respondent's press-
room, introduced himself to the pressmen and stereotypers employed there as
the special representative of the Union and invited them to attend a meeting at
the Carpenters Hall in Jackson that evening.
That evening, all these employees including Foreman Robbins and employee
Johnnie V. Gliettie, but excluding employee Joe Clontz, attended the meeting with
McCann and joined the Union. On June 17, the same employees were initiated
into the Union.
On June IS or 19, while attending a Lions Club luncheon at a hotel in Jackson,
Caleb Dortch, a close personal and business associate of Walter G. Johnson, Jr.,
who succeeded his father as general manager of the Respondent in October 1947,
heard from another employer in the printing industry of Jackson that a union
organizer was in town and that all the pressroom employees of the News had
joined the Union. The following day, another printing man inquired of Dortch
whether it was true that a union organizer was in Jackson. Dortch promptly
investigated the reports and learned from D. H. Robbins, foreman of the press-
room, that they were true.
Dortch's connection with the Respondent will he more fully considered hereinafter.
3 The connection between Caleb Dortch and the Respondent will be discussed in greater
detail hereinafter.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 573
In the paychecks the employees received on June 20, 1949, covering the work
performed for the News during the week of June 13 to June 20, all the pressroom
employees received a 10-cent per hour wage increase together with a note read-
ing as follows:
JUNE 20, 1949.
GENTLEMEN : If you will recall on March 15 I made each of you the proposi-
tion that if you would publish the paper in 46 hours, instead of the time in
which you were publishing the paper then, that no roan would sacrifice any
money by this more economical operation. You will recall that over the past
three months, polo salary has reflected our part in this action and since your
production is commensurate with your part of the agreement, we are hereby
adding a monetary reward to this week and the following week's check-
[Italics supplied.]
(S) JACKSON DAILY NEWS.
WALTER G. JoiiNsoN, Jla., Gen. Mgr.
On June 20,' having just returned from his vacation and having learned that
all the pressroom employees had joined the Union and had received a wage
increase, employee Clontz, General Manager .Johnson's cousin, went immediately
to see Johnson to learn whether he had received the raise and to seek advice
as to whether or not he should join the Union. Clontz informed Johnson that
all the men in the pressroom had joined the Union and were telling him that.
he also should join and asked what he should do. Johnson answered : "Joe, I
don't give a damn-if everybody else has joined, I don't see any reason why you
shouldn't. Go ahead and join up with the thing." Clontz then said: "Do you
want me to tell you what goes on'?" To which Johnson answered: "Well, if you.
want to ; it doesn't make any difference to inc. I don't particularly care." 5
At about 4: 4.5 p. in. on June 20, after having walked to the News building
with Dortch and during which time Johnson spoke to Dortch about promoting
employee Ghettie to the position of assistant foreman in the pressroom, a move
which Dortch verbally approved, Johnson summoned Ghettie and Foreman Rob-
bins to his office. Then in the presence of Dortch and Assistant General Man-
ages Meador, informed Ghettie that, as a reward for his good work, lie Was,.
being promoted "Assistant Foreman, effective right now, and with it,-goes the
responsibility, the duties, honor and pay of assistant foreman." Ghettie ac-
cepted. After Robbins stated that that was what he had recommended all along,.
the meeting broke up.
One June 27, Johnson, with Dortch again being present, summoned Robbins
to his office. Having by this time admittedly heard that all the employees of
the pressroom had joined the Union and that Robbins and Ghettie had become.
active members thereof, Johnson inquired about the truth of these matters of
Robbins, who acknowledged them to be true. Thereupon Johnson reminded
' Johnson confirmed the fact of this visit but placed it indefinitely as occurring between
the 24th and 26th of June. The positive testimony of Clontz as to the date of this meeting
has been accepted by the undersigned because it was definite, positive, and more logical
than the indefinite testimony of Johnson on the subject.
The above findings are made from Johnson's testimony which differed only in emphasis
from that of Clontz. Subsequently, both Johnson and Clontz agreed that Clontz made two
or three reports to Johnson by telephone calls to Johnson's home at about 6 : 30 a. m., until
Johnson got tired of being awakened In the "middle of the night" for this purpose and:
ordered Clontz to cease.
574 , DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Robbins that when he was promoted to the position of foreman, the News had
informed him of the "open shop principle" upon which it had been founded and
that there was to be no union activity in the pressroom. Johnson then de-
manded that Robbins abandon his union membership and activity or resign.
Johnson stated flatly that there was no law. which required him to work a fore-
man or assistant foreman who held a union card.6 Johnson suggested that
Robbins take out an honorary withdrawal card from the Union such as Dortch
had. Robbins agreed to cease his activities but demurred to abandoning his
membership.
On the morning of June 2S, Robbins took Ghettie in to Johnson's office where
he informed Johnson that he was not eligible for an honorary withdrawal card
and would lose all the benefits of membership by withdrawing from the Union.
After Johnson had reiterated that there was no law requiring him to work a
foreman or assistant foreman who held a union card, he demanded Robbins'
resignation. Robbins refused to resign and asked if he was fired. Johnson
refused to discharge him. Then they agreed that Robbins would cease all union
activities but could retain his membership. After this decision, Johnson turned
to Ghettie and inquired how he felt about the Union. Ghettie told him that he
was a free American citizen and had fought for the right to belong to any organi-
2ation he desired, that he was 100 percent for the Union, and that if the Union
wanted a contract at the News, he was all for it. Johnson's answer was: "Well,
you have made your bed, now lie in it."
Thereafter, Robbins and Johnson conferred again. At this time, Johnson
inquired about how Ghettie felt about the Union and stated that he was going
to give Ghettie a week to think it over. He then told Robbins : "You tell him
your stand if you want to because . . . as assistant foreman, he occupies the
same position as a supervisor that you do." Robbins agreed to talk to Ghettie.
On Jung 29, 1949, Johnson received a letter from McCann informing him that
the Union represented a majority of the employees of the News and requesting
a bargaining conference with the Respondent. Immediately upon receipt of
McCann's letter, Johnson called the pressroom employees together and made a
speech. In this speech he announced the receipt of the Union's letter and said
that this action of the men had "tied his hands" and that, because of their action,
he would no longer be able to raise wages, pay employees while they were on
sick leave, nor loan small amounts of money to employees as the Respondent had
customarily done in the past. Just before he concluded this speech, Johnson
turned to employee Norris who had requested a letter regarding his employ-
ment from the News to assist him in securing a Federal Housing Authority
loan, and said: "We are not going to be able to give you that letter at this
time." As Johnson turned to leave the room, he saw employee Gaar who 4 or 5
days previously had drawn a humorous cartoon depicting Johnson shooting
a revolver wildly at a rapidly retreating union man holding a contract in his hand
and said : "Incidentally, Gaar, I wouldn't miss that S. O. B. if I shot at him." °
About 11: 30 a. m. on July 1, McCann and O. K. Ghetti, secretary-treasurer
of the Union and brother of employee Ghettie, conferred with Johnson and his
No doubt, this was a reference to Section 2 (3) of the Taft -Hartley Act.
Although, the Respondent did stop making small loans for a short period , Johnson soon
reinstated the Respondent ' s old established policy of small loans and of granting paid
sick leave . Subsequently , also, Johnson not only wrote the letter requested by Norris but
even went so far as to personally request favorable action thereon . Johnson's bark proved
much worse than his bite . However, just bow soon the old policies were reestablished is
not shown in this record.
JACKSON DAILY NEWSi 575
counsel regarding the Union's claim that the employees were being coerced.
The Respondent promised that there would be no coercion.
About noon that same day, Johnson saw Robbins, mentioned that Robbins
had been asking for some time off 8 and told Robbins to "take off" until July 5,
because "we are going to ride (Ghetti) in on spurs"' with the Saturday, Sunday,
and Monday holiday paper as his sole responsibility. Seeing Robbins still in the
plant at 3 p. m., Johnson reiterated his order to Robbins but permitted him to
remain until the end of the day when told that Ghetti was enjoying his day
off.
The News was printed without incident during Robbins' vacation.
On July 5, Johnson and Meador called Gbettie and Robbins into the office
and after asking Ghettie again how he felt about this union activity, said:
"Before you answer, remember you are the assistant foreman of this press-
room back here, and in that position I have a perfect right to require you to be
neutral in your position, and I am going to ask you to give up your union activi-
ties ." When Ghettie answered that he was not going to give up his union ac-
tivities and that he was 100 percent for the Union and a contract with the Re-
spondent if the Union wanted it, Johnson told him to seek employment else-
where. As the others left the room, Johnson called Robbins back into the office
and asked : "I guess you wonder why I make a man assistant foreman one
week and fire him the next. . . . I guess you wonder why I gave you the
few days off." Although Robbins thought he knew the reason, he said "Yes,
Sir." However, Johnson's answer was: "I want yoti to see Mr. Ghettie gets out
of the building, not talk to any of the men, don't let him come back and tell
him to turn his uniforms in." That statement ended the conference."
Ghettie was paid off in full together with severance pay and has never been
reinstated.
On July 6, 1949, 0. K. Ghetti telephoned Johnson demanding the reinstate-
ment of his brother. When Johnson said that he would not discuss the matter
with Ghetti and Ghetti threatened to file unfair labor practices against him,
Johnson answered : "I don't give a - damn what you do." That ended the
conversation.
During the whole period commencing within a clay or so of June 16, and end-
ing only 2 weeks before the. present hearing began, Dortch, in the course of his
customary trips in and through the plant during working hours while advising
the employees in regard to their work, carried on a campaign of interference,
restraint, and coercion designed to cause those employees to abandon their mem-
berships in the Union. Among other occurrences during this period Dortch did
the following:
(1) Asked employee Ghettie prior to his promotion on June 20 to drop his
union activities, saying that he (Dorch) would talk to Johnson and see what
he could do for the employees; that Johnson would either fire everybody or
close the plant before he would have a union ;
8 Robbins had requested time off some time previously in order to do some planting but
he had not requested it at this time nor for some time.
9 An old army expression , according to Johnson.
10 Johnson vehemently denied having this private conference with Robbins characterizing
It as "a damnable lie." Although neither witness left the stand unimpeached , Johnson's
testimony proved to be inaccurate on vital matters in the hearing while Robbins ' impeach-
ment concerned collateral matters. Both witnesses were candid in most of their testimony.
Although the undersigned has accepted Robbins' version of this episode, he has used it with
caution because of his doubts about it.
576 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(2) Told employee Norris: "You boys might as well drop the Union, because
it won't go through" and said that, if Norris would drop the Union, "it would
get (him) more money"
(3) Delivered to -Meador a. letter from another newspaper offering employee
Norris higher wages than he was then receiving for the purported purpose of
securing more money for the News' employees from the Respondent;
(4) Told employees Norris, McCullough, and Sanderford: "We was too small
an outfit to try to get a contract with the Daily News, and that Mr. Johnson
would close the doors before he would sign any contract, and-he said it was all
right to hold the union card, he (Dortch) wouldn't follow the trade without one,
but he wouldn't-this was the wrong time to try to get a contract through,
a year ago would have been better, and that there were so many people out of
jobs, and so forth" ;
(5) Told employee Norris: "Tlie Union is going to cost a lot of money, lawyers'
fees and things like that. . . . You drop it, you will make more money" ;
(6) Told employee Wiggins that, while he did not have anything to do with
the Daily News," he wanted to say a few words to help Wiggins out, that John-
son was willing to bring the wage scale up to $1.50 an hour but could not do it
under "this situation" nor for possibly 3 or 4 years, and that "us boys won't
get any raises during that time and we would be left holding the bag" ;
(7) Told employee Sanderford that while Johnson would not close the doors
"if we would forget about this contract, he (Dortch) could guarantee every man
more money."
Sometime after August 26, 1949, Robbins inquired of Dortch before other
employees of the News and O. K. Ghet:ti what connection he had with the
Respondent. Dortch laughed and did not answer. About it week thereafter John-
son called Robbins into his office while Dortch was present and asked him what
he meant by asking Dortch that question before Ghetti. Johnson then informed
Robbins that, for Robbins' information, Dortch was not connected with the News
in any way but that, as a personal friend of Johnson, Dortch could come, go, and do
as lie pleased in the Respondent's building. Robbins then inquired if it was all
right for Dortch to confer with the Respondent's employees and "to try to pull
them out of the Union." Johnson answered : "What difference does that mean to
you, whether they pull out of the Union or not? Remember, you are part of
Management and any time you want to cease to be part of Management,, you
know what you can do." Robbins laughed saying that Johnson could fire him but,
as Dortch was a personal friend of Johnson, Robbins never intended to ask him
out of the building.
By the time of this last conversation the Respondent had posted signs re-
stricting entry into the pressroom to employees and authorized personnel only.
Dortch continued to circulate freely in and out of the pressroom talking with the
employees.
B. Conclusions
1. Interference, restraint, and coercion
The General Counsel in his complaint and brief contends that the Respondent
interfered with, restrained, and coerced the employees by (1) awarding the 10-
cent across-the-board pay increase of June 20 to the pressroom employees, (2)
11 This conversation which occurred in September 1949 is the only occasion when Dortch
disclaimed association with the News.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 577-
the talk made by Johnson to the employees on June 28, (3) the interrogation of"
the employees as to their union affiliations in an employment application form,
and (4 ) by the statements , acts, and conduct of its agent , Co-respondent Caleb
Dortch.'
Respondent depends upon three main contentions which are determinative.
of the instant case : ( 1) Caleb Dortch was all individual unconnected with the-
Respondent and not its agent , therefore the Respondent could not be held re-
sponsible for his actions , ( 2) Johnson had no knowledge of any union activities.
in the pressroom until a day or so before receiving the Union ' s letter dated
June 28, and (3 ) the statement by Dortch) and the speech by Johnson were.
protected by the freedom of speech section of the Act, Section 8 (c).
a. The status of Caleb Dortch
Dortch is somewhat of a mechanical genius in a pressroom. After considerable.
experience in other pressrooms, Dotch became pressroom foreman for the
Respondent under Johnson's father, then the general manager of the Respondent,
in the year 1923. A very close personal and business relationship grew up be-
tween Dortch and Johnson's family which continued unabated today. In 1928,
Dortch commenced an engraving concern under the name and style of the
Mississippi Engraving Company in Jackson. Dortch was encouraged and
assisted in this endeavor by Johnson's father both financially and otherwise. In
addition to his engraving business, Dortch remained as full-time pressroom
foreman for the Respondent until 1939 when the engraving business had in-
creased to such all extent as to require Dortch's full time. However, when
Dortch attempted to resign as pressroom foreman, Johnson, Sr., prevailed upon
him to remain as pressroom foreman dividing his time between the News and
the Mississippi Engraving Company. By 1943 the Mississippi Engraving Coin-
pany had grown so much that Dortch was forced to. resign from the News. At.
this time Johnson, Sr., created the position of "mechanical superintendent" at
$25 a week in order to retain Dortch in an advisory and supervisory capacity
with the News. In this position Dortch retained a watchful eye over the me-
chanical processes of the News and advised and assisted on the numerous occa-
sions he was in the plant on engraving business of the Mississippi Engraving:
Company which did all the engaving work for the News. As the Mississippi
Engraving Company has always been physically located in close proximity to
the News, Dortch has always been in and out of the pressroom of the News from
day to day. Shortly after this arrangement was agreed upon the pressroom at
the News demanded more money and, at Dortch's suggestion, $23 of Dortch's.
salary was divided among them. Thereafter Dortch received a salary of $2 per
week as mechanical superintendent at which time Johnson, Sr., expressed the
hope and desire that Dortch should always remain on the pay roll of the
Respondent.
This state of affairs continued until after the new press which Dortch recom-
mended be purchased by Respondent had been installed and placed in operation
and whose installation and reconditioning lie actively assisted and supervised.
On or about March 1I., 1949, the Respondent employed one Meade as mechanical
superintendent to try to reduce the hours of operation of the pressroom from 54
'= Although the complaint charged surveillance, the General Counsel appears to have
dropped this charge in his brief despite the obvious and admitted surveillance proved in
the Johnson-Clontz 'episode. The undersigned, therefore, is not considering this charge
in this Report.
903847-51-vol. 90 3S
,578 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and more to 46 hours per week. At this time the pressroom was notified that
Dortch would no longer act as mechanical superintendent. Two weeks later
Meade left the Respondent's employ. Thereafter Dortch continued his cus-
tomary practice of advising the pressroom in the operation of the press during
his numerous visits to the News as lie had done before. Although Johnson
testified positively and without equivocation that Dortch's connection with the
Respondent ceased on March 11, 1949, the facts finally disclosed that Dortch
not only continued his customary practices at the News but also continued to
receive his customary $2 per week salary, the last check being dated.Juue 13,
1949.11
Presently the Mississippi Engraving Company is doing a $100,000 per year
gross business from its 250 accounts. The account of the Respondent provides
approximately 10 percent of this gross business. Dortch gladly and willingly
places his mechanical knowledge and ability at the disposal of all his accounts
in order to create good will for his engraving business.
In addition to the very close personal friendship between the two, Johnson has
relied heavily on Dortch's advice since the death of his father in October 1947.
It was upon Dortch's recommendation that Johnson purchased the present press
of the News. The only person connected with the management of the Respondent
with whom Johnson consulted prior to the promotion of Ghettie on June 20 was
Dortch. Dortch was present when Ghettie was promoted on June 20. He was
present when Johnson ordered Robbins to cease his union activities on June 27.
Dortch has recommended or hired most of the present pressroom staff. As
recently as August 1949, he wanted to train a young man as'a pressman so that
individual was hired by the News on Dortch's recommendation. On another
occasion of indefinite, but apparently recent occurrence, a young lady appeared at
the News, calmly informed Johnson that Dortch had hired her for the News at
$50 a week for a then nonexistent job. Although Johnson confessed. to some
amazement, this same young lady was hired by the News a couple of weeks later
for the identical job suggested by Dortch but at $35 per week.
Soon after August 26, 1949, when Robbins complained that Dortch was attempt-
ing "to pull" his (Robbins') pressmen out of the Union, Johnson informed Robbins
that, as Johnson's personal friend, Dortch could come, do, and go in the News
Building as he pleased, even though entry into. the pressroom had previously been
restricted to employees and authorized personnel. In fact, on this occasion
Johnson inferentially threatened Robbins with discharge if he interfered with
Dortch's activities among the employees of the pressroom. Far from repudiating
Dortch's known antiunion conduct in the Respondent's building, the Respondent
through its general manager ratified those activities carried on by Dortch which
persisted until 2 weeks before the present hearing.
Under all the evidence it is clear and the undersigned finds, that Dortch was
both the apparent, and the actual, agent of the Respondent in his dealings with
the employees of the Respondent at all times material here.
b. Johnson's knowledge of the Union' s activities
Originally in answer to his counsel's question as to "when and in what form" he
had been first advised of the union organizational drive, Johnson testified: "My
first official knowledge of it came on the 27th of June when I received a registered
letter from the International Printing Pressman's & Assistants' Union of North
13 At the hearing the Respondent' s counsel referred to this as a "gratuity."
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 579
America, signed by Warren W. McCann, giving me five days to reply." " Subse-
quent testimony proved that he had heard "unofficially" about the drive "two or
three days" before his "official" knowledge, either through the office grapevine
or employee Joe Clontz. As found above, the undersigned has accepted Clontz'
testimony that his interview with Johnson occurred immediately upon his return
from his vacation on the -morning of June 20 when he first learned of both the
wage increase and of the anion activities in the pressroom, as logically the time
he, as Johnson's cousin, would have reported these new developments to John-
son as was his wont with matter affecting the welfare of the News. Thus John-
son had such knowledge on the morning of June 20.
However, by the 20th, the information that the pressroom of the Respondent
had joined the Union and that a union organizer was in Jackson was common
gossip in the printing trade in Jackson. Dortch had heard about it as early as
June 17 or 18 and had personally investigated its truth by June 18 or 19. If
Dortch, who had no ostensible connection with the Respondent, had been interro-
gated about it by that time, it seems highly improbable that the man most directly
affected by the news should have failed to have it called to his attention simul-
taneously. It is also highly improbable that Johnson and Meador whose desks are
on one side of the wall partitioning the pressroom from the newspaper's offices
and who are in the pressroom many times each day, could have failed to have
heard the news directly, especially as there was no evidence adduced that the
employees even attempted to conceal their activities. In fact, one employee even
drew a humorous cartoon regarding Johnson's presumed attitude toward the
Union which Johnson himself saw.
Johnson and Dortch both testified that Dortch did not inform Johnson of the
pressmen's actions after Dortch had learned about it for "several weeks" because
of an alleged "tiff" between the two occurring about that time. This alleged tiff
(lid not prevent Dortch from interviewing Robbins in the building on June 18 at
which time Robbins freely acknowledged that all the men had joined the Union.
There was no denial of the fact that Dortch, after requesting Ghettie to abandon
his union activities prior to Ghettie's promotion, had stated that he (Dortch)
would speak to Johnson about GlIettie. It is also obvious that he did so. Ad-
mittedly Johnson not only saw and asked Dortch's advice before promoting
Ghettie on the 20th, but, in fact, had Dortch present at the installation ceremony
in his office. Furthermore, Dortch was present on June 27 when Johnson sug-
gested to Robbins that he take out an honorary withdrawal card as Dortch had
done. With men as friendly and closely associated as Dortch and Johnson, it
is hard to believe that Johnson did not learn of the union drive from Dortch
promptly after Dortch learned of it. The story of the "tiff" is disproved by the
evidence of these men themselves. With a grapevine in the office and with duties
carrying him into the pressroom as often as they did, it is inconceivable to the
undersigned that Johnson did not know the facts immediately after their occur-
rence. Johnson had full knowledge, at least by the morning of June 20, and
the undersigned so finds.
The fact that the Respondent removed Dortch from its payroll for some un-
explained reason after making out his check dated June 13, that the pressroom
employees joined the Union on June 16, that Dortch promptly thereafter began
his campaign among the employees against the Union, that in the very next pay-
14 Actually this must have been about June 29, as the Union's letter referred to is dated
June 28. However , this difference is immaterial and the undersigned has used the earlier
dates throughout this Report as they were the dates used throughout the hearing.
580 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
roll on June 20 the pressmen received an unsolicited across-the-board raise, aiS
appear to be too closely associated in time to have been purely accidental and
constitute persuasive evidence of a considered, planned campaign against the
Union. This evidence leads the undersigned to the conclusion that the Respond--
ent and Johnson had knowledge of the Union's drive promptly after its comple-
tion on June 16-17.
As found above, Dortch took occasion during his numerous visits to the News
to advise the pressroom employees with both promises of benefits and threats of
reprisal to give up their union memberships and activities and not to press for a
contract with the Respondent. Respondent contends that these statements were
protected as opinions, views, and arguments under Section S (c) of the Act.
However, Dortch went far beyond the limits permissible under that section by-
threatening the men that Johnson would close the plant, that be would guarantee-
them more money if they would abandon the Union, that they would be better
off financially by giving up their union membership and activities and threaten-
ing them with unemployment. These statements, therefore, were not protected
under Section S (c) as they contained both threats of reprisal or force and prom-
ise of benefits.
The undersigned finds that the statements of Dortch, as found above. tended
to interfere with, restrain, and coerce the employees of the Respondent and
that the statements were made by an agent of the Respondent for that purpose so-
that both Dortch individually and the Respondent are responsible for such
violations of Section S (a) (1).
c. dohnso.'s speech of June 28
. In this speech as made, and as found above, Johnson accused the emmployees
of "tying his hands" by their action in joining the Union and stated that there-
after the Respondent would no longer lend small sums of money to the employees
nor grant them sick leave with pay, both customary practices of the Respondent
which the Respondent continued in effect for the benefit of all its employees
other than those in the pressroom. Johnson's statement to Norris that he could
no longer give Norris a letter of recommendation required for his FHA loan
was particularly coercive.
The fact that later Johnson's bark proved worse than his bite when he subse-
quently restored these customary practices and wrote the letter for Norris does
not relieve the Respondent of the coercion practiced upon the employees by
Johnson's withdrawal of them in his speech because of their union activity.
For the same reasons as given above in regard. to Dortch's statement, this
speech was not protected by Section 8 (c) of the Act.
The undersigned, therefore, finds that Respondent by reason of the speech
made by Johnson on June 29 interfered with, restrained, and coerced its em-
ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act
in violation of Section S (a) (1) thereof.
d. Interrogation through eni,ploynren-t applicat-ions
Applicants for employment at the News mere given an application form to fill
out containing the following questions : "Name of civic club, church, fraternal
orders, labor organizations, or professional societies or groups of which you are
or have been a member in the past two years." The Board" and the courts
15 Fairmont Creamery Company, 73 NLRB 1380, footnote 1 at p. 1381.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 581
have uniformly held that such questions concerning an applicant's membership
in a labor organization on an employment application form constitute illegal
interrogation violating Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act and the undersigned so finds.
The Respondent contends that the applicant was not required to fill out this
-question. There is nothing on the form so indicating. The.question regarding
union affiliations must be eliminated from such application forms.
e. The wage increase of June 20
On June 16 the pressroom employees all joined the Union and 4 days thereafter
on the June 20 payroll, they all received an unannounced and unsolicited 10-cent
per hour wage increase.
June 20, 1949, was a most important day in other regards also. It was on
the morning of June 20, as found heretofore, that employee Clontz informed
Johnson that all the pressroom employees had joined the Union. They were the
only employees affected by the wage increase. Later (luring the day of June 20
Meador made up the payroll from time slips laid upon his desk by Robbins
about 3 a. in. the preceding Sunday. It was from this same June 20 payroll
that Dortch's salaried connection with the Respondent finally ended after 26
.years and it was (luring the afternoon of June 20 that Ghettie was made assist-
ant foreman by Johnson in Dortch's presence and with Dortch's approval.
Furthermore, it was almost from this date that Dortch suddenly switched from
urging Robbins to join the Union to encouraging him and the other union
members to abandon the Union. All these events are inexplicably interwoven
one with the other. Too many related events occurred on this very same date
for it to have been purely accidental.
However, the Respondent urges that the payroll raise of June 20 was merely
the fulfillment of a promise made to the pressroom employees by Johnson on
or about March 11, 1949. At that time Meade had been employed to reduce the
hours of operation in the pressroom from 54 or more to 46 per week. When the
pressroom employees, especially those employed under the Veterans' Training
Plan, learned of this incipient reduction of hours and consequently of take-
home pay, they all attempted to resign. In order to forestall these resignations,
Johnson promised them that, if they would reduce the hours and get the paper
-out on time so that it could begin making various trains and bus commitments,
he would promise that the employees would not lose financially thereby. With
that the employees returned to work. On March 2S and 29 all the pressroom
employees except three were granted either 5 or 10 cents per hour increase,"
although Johnson testified that he did not intend to raise some of the employees
because he believed that they had been padding their overtime claims. The
-employees understood, and were so informed by Robbins, that this raise fulfilled
Johnson's March promise.
The hours of operation in the pressroom were promptly reduced and the paper
began making its train and bus schedules.
Johnson testified, however, that the June 20 raise vas necessary to fulfill
his March promise that the men would not lose financially by the reduction
in hours. A calculation made by the Respondent in evidence shows that, after
the March raise, on a theoretical 46-hour week the men generally would have
16 The three who did not receive these increases were : Foreman Robbins , who had been
advanced $5 per month only 4 months previously ; J. C. Johnson, a 70-year old relative of
the general manager. who was already the highest paid employee in the pressroom by 12%
cents; and Shank, who had only been employed during the previous month.
582 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
lost $1 or $2 per week from their average earnings prior to the raise, but the
fact is that , despite all efforts, there still remained some overtime , even though
reduced, so that the take-home pay after the March increase must have re-
mained just about the same as that received prior to the increase. The employees
did not complain. Another Respondent computation shows that, even without
extra overtime, the June 20 pay increase figured on the same theoretical 46-hour
basis increased the take-home pay of each employee in the pressroom from $2
to nearly $7 per week over their pre-March average earnings. Thus, this in-
crease more than fulfilled Johnson's promise. The facts disprove Respondent's
contention.
Furthermore , in each pay envelope on June 20 the Respondent placed a
notice dated that same day, quoted above, which refutes the testimony of John-
son when it states, after recalling his March promise : "You will recall that
over the past three months your salary has reflected our part in this action"
and since your production is commensurate with your part of the agreement, we
are hereby adding a .monetary reward to this week and the following week's
check."" [Emphasis supplied.]
The undersigned has already rejected Johnson's defense based upon his alleged
lack of knowledge of the Union.
The undersigned believes, and therefore finds, that this "monetary reward"
was granted to the employees of the pressroom on June 20, 1949, in conjunction
with the other actions of that day, as an integral part of the Respondent 's scheme
to interfere with, restrain , and coerce the employees into abandoning their union
membership and activities in violation of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.
f. Discharge of Johnnie V. Ghettie, Jr.
Johnson testified very candidly that he would have retained in his employ
Johnnie V. Ghettie "if [Ghettie ] had agreed to drop his union activities and
[Johnson ] would take Ghettie back if I could be satisfied in my own mind that
Mr. Ghettie would come back to the Daily News ( and) drop all his union activ -
ities. . . ."
Ghettie was the leader , both mechanically and otherwise , of the employees
.of the pressroom. He had automatically stepped into the shoes of the former
assistant foreman when that employee left the Respondent 's employ in April
1949. He was also the brother of the Union's secretary, O. K. Ghetti, and lived
on one side of a duplex house while his brother occupied the other half thereof..
Ghettie was the natural person to promote if there were to be an assistant
foreman both by reason of his natural leadership and of his mechanical ability.
In a pressroom of 11 employees including the foreman, an assistant foreman is
hardly a necessity as proved by the fact that the Respondent has had such a
supervisory official for a period of only 15 days in the 6-month period from the
end of April to the latter part of October 1949, the date of the present hearing.
The position of assistant foreman in the Respondent 's pressroom , as described
by Johnson , is an anomalous one. His duties change with the presence or absence
of the foreman. When the foreman is present the duties of such an assistant
foreman would be those of any journeyman pressman . In the absence of the
foreman, such an assistant foreman would temporarily step into the foreman's
17 I. e ., the employees had suffered no financial loss in the 3-month period since the making
of the promise.
18 This "monetary reward" has been paid continuously since and was not limited to -the
two payrolls mentioned.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 583
shoes.19 Johnson "suspected" that the foreman and the assistant foreman
"would confer" on the hiring or discharge of any employees when they were both
present. In the absence of the foreman, Johnson would "expect" the assistant
foreman to discharge for a serious offense. In the history of the News, there had
been no concrete. examples of these duties.
After April, Johnson testified that Ghettie became "the assistant foreman
without port folio," a "quasi-supervisor." The only difference in Ghettie's duties
after receiving his "port folio" on June 20 was a 30-cent per hour wage increase,.
10 cents of which he received in the general increase of June 20, and 20 cents
of which came in the check received on June 27 carefully made to "Johnnie V.
Ghettie, Jr., Asst. Foreman."
In its brief the Respondent makes much of the fact that Ghetti.e-was in full,
charge of the pressroom "50 percent" of the time during his tenure with port
folio. This was true solely because of Johnson's insistence that Robbins enjoy
an unsolicited Fourth of July holiday so that they "could ride Ghettie in on
spurs."
Under these facts, the undersigned is convinced that the assistant foreman.
does not occupy a bona fide supervisory status within the meaning of Section 2'
(11) of the Act and finds that Ghettie at all times material herein was in the
capacity of a lead man rather than a supervisor.
In addition, as already indicated, the actions of the Respondent on June 20
constitute proof that on that day the Respondent began executing a carefully
conceived three-pronged drive designed to discourage or eliminate the union
memberships and activities of its pressroom employees. Each prong of thisl
drive represented one of the three usual strategems : the kind, the persuasive, and
the tough. The first prong was represented by the unsolicited across-the-board
wage increase amounting to between $2 and $7 per employee per week : a demon-
stration that the employees would profit economically more by reliance upon
the Respondent's largess than upon the Union's bargaining. The second prong,
loosely referred to as the "persuasive," was represented by the removal of Dortch
from his salaried status with Respondent and his coincidental switch from advice-
to join the Union to the exact opposite, to renounce the Union. Dortch's removal
from the payroll at this particular time coinciding with his change in attitude
was obviously for the purpose. of creating the defence advanced here : that Dortch
was not an agent or representative of the Respondent for whose acts the Re-
spondent should legally be held responsible regardless of the threats or blandish-
ments employed. The last, or tough, prong was represented by the alleged pro-
motion of Ghettie to an ostensible supervisory position for the equally obvious-
purpose of either silencing the natural leader of the pressroom or, if circum-
stances should require, of eliminating him from employment by removing him
from the protection of the Act through the supervisor exemption clause of Section
2 (3) of the amended Act and thus permitting the Respondent to discharge him
for union activities without fear of liability. In this instance the Respondent
was forced to sterilize his influence by discharging him on July 5, 1949. By
thus discharging the natural leader for refusing to abandon his union activities,.
the Respondent in fact coerced and restrained the remainder of its employees
by conclusively demonstrating to them the danger to their own job security in
refusing to succumb to the blandishments and threats of the other two prongs.
of Respondent's campaign. While the Respondent's scheme shows skill and in-
is From April through October 1949 , Foreman Robbins bad only been absent a couple of
days in May and , on Johnson 's orders, 3 or 4 days in July.
.584 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
genuity in its conception and execution , still its antiunion purpose still shines
-clearly through.
Therefore the undersigned finds that the Respondent promoted Johnnie V.
Ghettie, Jr. to an ostensible supervisory position on June 20, 1949, for the purpose
of ending his own union activities as well as to discourage those of his fellow
,employees and that the Respondent discharged the said Ghettie on July 5, 1949,
for his refusal 'to abandon his union activities in order to coerce and restrain
the other employees from exercising their right guaranteed in Section 7 in viola-
tion of , Section S (a) (1) of the Act and further that , by these same acts, the
Respondent discriminated in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of said
•Ghettie in order to discourage membership in the Union in violation of Section S
( a) (3) of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRAC TICES UPON COMMERCE
It is found that the activities of the Respondent and Co -respondent set forth
in Section III, above , occurring in connection with the operations described in
Section I , above, have a close , intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic,
and commerce among the several States, and tend to lead to labor disputes
-burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V. TIIE REMEDY
Raving found that the Respondent and' Co-respondent have engaged in certain
unfair labor practices, the undersigned will recommend that they cease and de-
sist therefrom , and that they take certain affirmative action which the under-
signed finds will effectuate the policies of the Act.
The undersigned has found that the Respondent discriminated in regard
to the hire and tenure of employment of Johnnie V. Ghetti, Jr . by discharging him
on July 5, 1949 . The undersigned will therefore recommend that the Respondent
-offer Johnnie V. Ghettie , Jr. immediate and full reinstatement to his former
or substantially equivalent employment, without prejudice to his seniority or
other rights and privileges , and make him whole for any loss of pay which he
may have suffered by reason of the Respond ent ' s•discrimi.nation against him
by payment to him of a sum of money equal to the amount which he would
normally have earned as wages from the date of his discharge to the date of
the Respondent ' s offer of reinstatement , less his net earnings during said period 20
Because the Respondent 's actions herein clearly indicate a basic conception
of opposition to the purposes of the Act with the likelihood of further resort to
unfair practices in the future, the undersigned will recommend that the Respond-
,ent cease and desist from in any manner infringing upon the rights of employees
guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record in
the case, the undersigned makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS of LAw
1. International Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Union of North America,
.Jackson Printing Pressmen and Assistants ' Local 215 , A. F. L., is a labor organi-
zation within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of John-
nie V. Ghettie , Jr., thereby discouraging membership in International Printing
20 Crossett Lumber Co., 8 NLRB 440.
JACKSON DAILY NEWS, 585 ,
Pressmen & Assistants ' Union of North America , Jackson Printing Pressmen
and Assistants ' Local 215 , A. F. L., the Respondent has engaged in, and is en-
gaging in, unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section S (a) (3) of the
Act.
3. By interfering with, restraining , and coercing its employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act , the Respondent and Co-respond-
ent Dortch have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices within
the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.
4. The unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce,
within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and
upon the entire record in the case, the undersigned recommends that the Re-
spondent, Jackson Daily News, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,,
shall :
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Discouraging membership in International Printing Pressmen and Assist-
ants' Union of North America, Jackson Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Local
215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization of its employees, by discharging, or
discriminating in any other manner in regard to the hire, tenure of employment,
or any term or condition of employment of any of its employees;
(b) Urging, persuading, or warning its employees by threats of reprisal or
force or promise of benefit to refrain from assisting, becoming or remaining
members of the Union, or engaging in concerted activities ; questioning its em-
ployees concerning their membership in and activities on behalf of the Union
through employment application forms or otherwise; threatening its employees
with loss of employment should they assist, become or remain members of the
Union, or engage in concerted activity ; threatening to close its operations
in order to discourage membership in the Union; or in any other manner
interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of
the right to self-organization, to form, join or assist labor organizations, in-
cluding International Prjnting Pressmen & Assistants' Union of North America,
Jackson Printing Pressmen and Assistants Local 215, A. F. L., or any other labor
organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choos-
ing, and to engage in concerted activities, for the purposes of collective bargaining
or other mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from any or all of such activities,
except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring
membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized
in'Section 8 (a) (3).
2. Take the following affirmative action which the undersigned finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Offer to Johnnie V. Ghettie, Jr., immediate and full reinstatement to his.
former or substantially equivalent position as assistant foreman of the pressroom
without prejudice to his seniority or other rights and privileges, and make him
whole for any loss of pay which he may have suffered as the result of his discharge
by payment of a sum of money to him equal to that which he normally would
have earned as wages during the period from the date of his discharge to the
date of the Respondent's offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings during such
period : 21
21 See Section under "The remedy."
-586 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(b) Post in its pressroom and offices in Jackson, Mississippi, copies of the
-notice attached hereto marked Appendix A. Copies of said notice, to be furnished
by the Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region, shall, after being duly
-executed by the Respondent's representative and by Co-respondent Dortch, be
posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it
for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous
places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted.
Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to insure that such notices
rare not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material ; and
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region in writing, within
twenty (20) days from the date of the receipt of this Intermediate Report, what
-steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith.
Upon the same basis, the undersigned recommends that the Co-respondent
Caleb Dortch and his agents and representatives, shall :
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) In any manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing the employees
-of the Respondent in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to form, join
or assist labor organizations, including International Printing Pressmen &
.Assistants' Union of North America, Jackson Printing Pressmen and Assistants'
Local 215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization, to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activi-
ties, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or other mutual aid or protection,
.as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action :
(a) Post in the pressroom and offices of Respondent, with Respondent's per-
mission, in Jackson, Mississippi, copies of the notice attached hereto marked
Appendix A for a period of sixty (60) consecutive days in conspicuous places,
including all places where notices to employees of the Respondent are customarily
posted ;
(b) Notify the Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region in writing, within
twenty (20) days from the date of this Intermediate Report what steps the
-Co-respondent has taken to comply herewith.
It is further recommended that the National Labor Relations Board issue
an order requiring the Respondent and Co-respondent Dortch to take the action
aforesaid, unless the Respondent notifies said Regional Director in writing,
on or before twenty (20) days from the date of the receipt of this Intermediate
Report, that it will comply with the foregoing recommendations.
As provided in Section 203.46 of the Rules and Regulations of the National
Labor Relations Board any party may, within twenty (20) days from the date
-of service of the order transferring the case to the Board, pursuant to Section
203.45 of said Rules and Regulations, file with the Board an original and six
copies of a statement in writing setting forth such exceptions, to the Intermediate
Report and Recommended Order or to any other part of the record of proceedings
(including rulings upon all motions or objections) as he relies upon, together
with the original and six copies of a brief in support thereof ; and any party may,
within the same period, file an original and six copies of a brief in support of the
Intermediate Report and Recommended Order. Immediately upon the filing
-of such statement of exceptions and/or briefs, the party filing the same shall
serve a copy thereof upon each of the other parties. Statements of exceptions
and briefs shall designate by precise citation the portions of the record relied
upon and shall be legibly printed or mimeographed, and if mimeographed shall
be double spaced. Proof of service on the other parties of all papers filed with
JACKSON DAILY NEWS 587
ithe Board shall be promptly made as required by Section 203.85. As further
provided in said Section 203.46 should any party desire permission to argue orally,
'before the Board, request therefor must be made in writing to the Board within
ten (10) days from the date of service of the order transferring the case to the
Board.
In the event no Statement of Exceptions is filed as provided by the aforesaid
Rules and Regulations, the findings, conclusions, recommendations, and recom-
mended order herein contained shall, as provided in Section 203.48 of said
Rules and Regulations, be adopted by the Board and become its findings, con-
,clusions, and order, and all objections thereto shall be deemed waived for all
.purposes.
Dated at Washington, D. C., this 15th day of February 1950.
THOMAS S. WILSON,
Trial Examiner.
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that :
WE WILL NOT in any manner interfere with, restrain , or coerce our em-
ployees in the exercise of their right to self-organization , to form labor
organizations , to join or assist INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN &
ASSISTANTS ' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, JACKSON PRINTING PRESSMEN AND
ASSISTANTS' LOCAL 215, A. F. L., or any other labor organization , to bargain
collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage
in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection.
WE WILL OFFER to the employee named below immediate and full reinstate-
ment to his former or substantially equivalent position without prejudice
to any seniority or other rights and privileges previously enjoyed, and make
him whole for any loss of pay suffered as a result of the discrimination.
Johnnie V. Ghettie, Jr.
All our employees are free to become or remain members of the above-named
union or any other labor organization. We will not discriminate in regard to
hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment against
any employee because of membership in or activity on behalf of any such labor
organization.
JACKSON DAILY. NEWS, Employer.
Dated -------------------- By ----------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
Dated -------------------- CALEB.DORTCH, Co-respondent.
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must
not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.