John Day Jackson

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 13, 1942

42 N.L.R.B. 356 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of JOHN DAY JACKSON . THE C ARRINGTON PUBLISHING
COMPANY, THE CARRINGTON COMPANY and NE\v HAS EN NEWSPAPER
GUILD, AFFIi ,I 1TED WI'i II AMERICAN NEw Sr SPCA GUILD
Case No C-1918 -Pec?ded July 1 3,194f2
Jurisdiction . new spapet pnbl ish i ng industt N
Unfair Labor Practices
Intetfeieme Resfiuntt oold Coetumi watai ng eoalo%ee, against engaging in
union actii itl , i efucnng to pet twit non-eniplovees to appeal oil behalt of
union , questuiwing eniplolees concetntng membet,hip ni union accusing union
and membeis of illegal actti ity
D,scrtniniat,on chaiges of, disnnssed as to allegation that emplo^ei iefu-ed to
make pay lane peunaneit bec.nise of union nnenibei Jiip , sustained a, to
charge that ennplmen depitied of newspapet l -lute because of union meni-
heishtp and actiltty and dischaigod because of such activty and because she
gate testimony raider the Act
Remedial Orders tennstatenront and hack pan otdeied Iestoiatton of p1i'ilege
of having signed tea to t e scot nes and book i e'. news in new spapet in manner
and to extent which would obtain absent untati labor practices, scope oidei
issued against all i espondents who me totted to he emploN el s w ithui the nte.m-
ing of the Act, aftumalive cider with ie,pect to discharged et iploie0 dnected
solely to the iespondetit who emploj ed such pet son
Mr Chizstopher IV Hoey, for the Board
Mr Elisha Hanson, of Washington. D C , and Mr Ai non D
Thomas, of New Haven, Conn , for the iesponclent I
Mr Nelson Harris, of New Haven, Conn , and Mr Abi ahanr J Isser-
m an, of Newark, N J, for the Guild
Miss Marcia Hertzmaik, of counsel to the Board
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon c11ai ges and amended charges dilly filed by New Haven N ens s-
paper Guild, herein called the Guild, affiliated with Ameiican News-
paper Guild, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the
Board, by the Regional Dnectot for the Second Region (New loik
City), issued its complaint dated Match 24, 1941, against John Dav
Jackson, The Cat i tngton Publishing Coii-ipany, and The Carrington
42NLRB,No83
356
JOHN DAY JACKSON '357
`Conipanv,'betem collectively called the respondents, alleging that the
-respondent .John Day Jackson had engaged tin and was engaging In
unfair labor practices affecting commerce vv ithm the meaning of Sec-
tion 8 (1) and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat 449, herein :galled the Act, and that the re-
spondents The Carrington Publishing Company and The Carrington
Company had engaged in and w eie engaging nn unfair labor practices
affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and Section
2 (6) and (7) of the Act Copies of the complaint, accompanied by
'notice of hearing, were duly served upon the respondents and the
Guild
With respect to the unf.un labor pi actnces, the complaint alleged in.
substance that from about March 15, 1940. the iespondents urged, per-
suaded, and warned then employees to jefnam from aiding, becoming,
on iemaning members of the Guild, expressed hostility toward the
Guild, and threatened their employees witli dmschaige or other ie-
prrsals if they aided the Guild or its membeis The complaint fur-
thei alleged that the respondent Jackson disctinunated in respect to
the terms and conditions of employment of Gladys Al Solomon by
educing her pay on of ,about Apiil 1, 1940, and by depriving her of
the pnrvilege of having signed aiticles in the Sunday edition of the
New Haven Registei, said discrnnuiations being because of her Guild
affiliation, and that the iespondent Jackson has since refused and
refuses to iennstate Solomon to hei formes salary and piivileges
On Apt rl 15, 1941, the iespondents filed ur answer denying the ma-
teiial allegations of the complaint, denying the jurisdiction of the
Board, and setting forth ceitam afflimative defenses At the same
time the respondents filed a motion to dmsnuss the complaint upon the
ground, inter aha, that they are not engaged in commerce, within the
meaning of the Act
Pit siiant to notice, a heating was held on May 5, 6, 13, and 14, 1941,
at New Haven, Connecticut, before Samuel H Jaffee, the Trial Ex-
amnner duly designated by the Chief Taal Examiner The Board,
the respondents, and the Guild were represented by counsel and par-
ticipated in the heating Full opportunity to be head, to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence hearing upon
the issues was afforded all parties
At the beginning of the hear mg, the Ti man Examiner denied the
pending motion of the respondents to dismiss the complaint and a
motion by counsel for the Board to strike designated portions of the
respondents' answer During the hearing the respondents, on two
occasions, moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that they had
been denied due process because of certain statements published in
periodicals in New Haven, Connecticut, prior to and following the
358 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
issuance of the complaint in this case. The Trial Examiner denied the
motions . At various times during the hearing, counsel for the re-
spondents moved 'to dismiss; the motions were denied except as to a
motion by The Carrington Company, ruling on which was reserved.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Boaid's motion to conform the
pleadings to the proof was allowed without objection. During the
course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made various rulings on other
motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board
has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prej-
udicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The
respondents filed a brief with the Trial Examiner following the hearing.
On June 21, 1941, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate Re-
port, copies of which were duly served upon the parties, finding that
the respondent Jackson had engaged in unfair labor practices within
the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the Act and that the respondents The Carrington Publishing Company
and The Carrington Company had engaged in unfan labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the Act. He denied all pending motions of the respondents to dismiss
the complaint The Trial Examiner's rulings are hereby affirmed.
The respondents thereafter filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report
and a brief in support of the exceptions. They also requested oral
argument before the Board.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing for the purpose of oral argument was
held before the Board on August 14, 1941, in Washington, D C. The
respondents and the Guild appeared by counsel and participated in the
argument . The Board has considered the exceptions of the respond-
ents and insofar as the exceptions are inconsistent with the findings,
conclusions, and order set forth below, finds no merit in them
On August 6, 1941, the Guild filed a further charge which was desig-
nated as Case No II-C-3917. On September 16, 1941, the Board
ordered that Case No. II-0-3917 be consolidated with and made a
part of the prior case, No. C-1918, that the recoid in Case No. C-1918
be reopened, that a further hearing be held, and that the Regional
Director be authorized to issue a supplemental complaint in the pro-
ceeding Upon an amended charge by the Guild, filed on October 9,
1941, the Board issued a supplemental complaint, dated the same
day, alleging that the respondent Jackson had engaged in and was
engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the
meaning of Section 8 (1), (3), and (4) and Section 2 (6) and (7)
of the Act. Copies of the supplemental complaint and notice of hear-
ing were duly served upon all parties. Concerning the unfair labor
practices, the supplemental complaint alleged in substance that the
respondent Jackson discharged Gladys Solomon on August 2, 1941,
I JOHN DAY JACKSON 359
because she joined or assisted the Guild and because she gave testi-
mony at the Board hearing in May 1941. The respondents thereafter
filed an answer to the supplemental complaint, denying the commis-
sion of the -unfair labor practices therein alleged
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on October 22'and 23, 1941, -
at New Haven, Connecticut, before Martin Raphael, the Trial Exam-
iner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Board-, the
respondents, and the Guild were represented by counsel and partici-41
pated in the hearing Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing upon the
issues was afforded all parties At the conclusion of the Board's case
the respondents moved to dismiss the supplemental complaint for
failure of proof and also moved that it be dismissed as to The Carring-
ton Publishing Company and The Carrington Company. The Trial
Examiner reserved ruling on these motions. The motions were re-
newed at the conclusion of the, hearing and the Trial Examiner re-
-served ruling thereon. The motions are hereby denied.' The Trial
Examiner granted a motion by counsel for the Board to conform the
pleadings to the proof. During the course of the hearing the Trial
Examiner made various rulings on other motions and on objections
-to the admission of evidence The Board has reviewed the rulings
of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were com-
mitteed The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On November 7, 1941, the Board issued an order directing that no
Intermediate Report be issued in the further hearing, and, acting pur-
suant to Article II, Section 37 (c), of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered the issuance
of proposed findings of fact, proposed conclusions of law, and pro-
posed order, and that, pursuant to Article II, Section 37, of said
Rules and Regulations, the parties would have the right to file excep-
tions and briefs within 30 days and to request oral argument within
20 days from the date of said proposed findings, conclusions, and
order. The respondents and the Guild thereafter filed briefs,' on
November 13 and 24 respectively, which the Board has considered.
On March 27, 1942, the Board issued Proposed Findings of Fact,
Proposed Conclusions of Law, and Proposed Order, copies of which
were duly served upon all parties. Exceptions thereto were filed by
the respondents on April 25, 1942, and by the Guild on April 27, 1942.
The respondents also filed a brief in support of their exceptions and
requested permission to argue orally before the Board.
1 In connection with the motion to dismiss as to The Carrington Publishing Company and
The Carrington Company, it should be noted that the supplemental complaint alleges
violations of the Act by the respondent John Day Jackson only and is issued against him
alone Our order with respect to the allegations in the supplemental complaint will run
against John Day Jackson only
360 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Pursuant to notice, a heating for the purpose of oral argument was
held before the Board on May 5, 1942, in Washington, D C The ie-
spondents and the Guild appeared by counsel and participated in the
argument The Board has considered the exceptions to the Pro-
posed Finding of'Fact, Proposed Conclusions of Law, and Proposed
Order and insofar as they are inconsistent with the findings,
conclusions, and order set forth below, finds no merit in them
Upon the entii e record in the case, the Board mikes the following
FINDINGS or FACT
I THE BUSINESS OF TIIE ItESI'O\DEN'TS
John Day Jackson is the owner and publisher of a duly newspaper
in New Haven, Connecticut. known as the New Haven Register The
Carrington Publishing Company is a Connecticut coipotatiou which
owns and publishes at New Haven a daily newspaper known as the
New Haven Joui real-Coulter , it is a subsidiar' of The Cait ulgtoli
Company, also a Connecticut corporation ' Both corporations have
their principal offices and places of business in New Haven in a build-
ing owned by Jackson
Of the 2,100 shares of preferred stock of The Carrington Publish-
ing Company, The Gurington Company owns 1,989 shares, of the
2,675 shares of common, it owns 2,665 shares Of the 40 shales
of preferred stock of The Caiiington Company, 1 stockholder owus
28 shares and the remainder is distributed among 4 other persons,
of the 2,665 shares of common (which is votulg stock) Jackson
owns 1,865 shales, and his wife owns the iemainclel Thus, Jackson,
who owns, controls, and publishes the Register, is the owner of a large
majority of the stock of another corporation owning and publishing
the Journal-Courier Jackson thus controls both the Register and
the Jouunal-Courier The evidence clearly indicates, and we find
that this contl of i5 an active one, extending, inter' alia, to the labor
policy of both newspapeis -
The Register is published each weekday evening and Sunday morn-
ing The Journal-Conn icr is a moi ung newspaper pubhshel every
clay except Sunday They are the only daily newspapers published
2 The complaint alleged and the iespondenl5 ' answei admitted that The Caiiinton
inbliahuig Lomnpiii is wholly owned ind controlled by The Carimgton Compin' , as
indicated below, howesei , a small peicentage of the ahaies aie not owned by the holding
companl
3U A L R IC N 11 blliani Randolph Item t, et at , 102 F (2d) 638 (C C A 9) enf g 1s
mod Matte) of 11 ill ant Randolph Hearst , et (R , and American lcu,spaye) G'add Seattle
Chapte,, 2 N I B B 330 , The Pies Co, Inc and The Gannett Company N N L R B ,
118 F (2d) 937 (App D C ), enfg Afatter of The Press Go, Inc and The Gannett Com-
pany and ii City Newspaper Guild of Albano, Tioy and Schenectady, N