Metropolitan Imprinters Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 25, 1961

133 N.L.R.B. 1433 (N.L.R.B. 1961)

METROPOLITAN IMPRINTERS CORPORATION 1433
that argument is that the General Counsel failed to produce any customers to refute
their testimony . Moreover , it strikes me that if there had been any pattern of ob-
jectionable , obnoxious , or discourteous treatment of customers on the part of the
handbillers it would have been uncovered in the course of the investigation of the
case and the General Counsel could have produced at least a few customers to testify
on that score . Considering all the evidence I am convinced that the handbilling was
conducted in an orderly manner . I so find.
Counsel urges that the Respondent was denied due process at the hearing because
of the General Counsel's refusal to make a reasonable statement of his position or
theory of the case, the inadequacy of the complaint , and the admission in evidence of
acts occurring at stores which were unsupported by appropriate allegation in the
complaint . Granting the foregoing to be correct I am satisfied the record shows the
Respondent was not prejudiced insofar as any substantive rights are concerned.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record, I make
the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The operations of Schepps Grocery Co. occur in commerce within the meaning
of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. The retail stores named in the complaint are persons engaged in commerce or in
an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (ii ) of the Act.
3. General Drivers , Warehousemen and Helpers Local Union No. 968 is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
4. The Respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices as alleged in the
complaint within the meaning of Section 8(b), subsection ( 4) (ii) (B ) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
Metropolitan Imprinters Corporation i and Detroit Bindery
Workers Union No. 20, International Brotherhood of Book-
binders, AFL-CIO and Detroit Printing Pressmen and Assist-
ants Union No. 2 of the International Printing Pressmen and
Assistants Union of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioners.
Cases Nos. 7-RC-4849 and 7-RC-4850. October 25, 1961
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Burlon R. Horowitz, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
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 McCulloch and Members Fanning and Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act 2
'Employer ' s name was amended at the hearing
2 Employer 's contention that it does not meet our jurisdictional standards is without
merit. The Employer furnishes services valued in excess of $50,000 annually to enter-
prises which satisfy the Board's jurisdictional standards . Accordingly , the Board finds
133 NLRB No. 126.
1434 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate units :
The Printing Pressmen petitioned for a unit of pressmen in the
Employer's Detroit, Michigan, plant; the Bindery Workers requested
a unit of the remaining employees who are engaged in binding, finish-
ing, and shipping operations. The Employer contends that due to
its small operations the only appropriate unit is an overall unit.
The Employer does imprinting on materials sent it by clients.
Thereafter, it forwards the material to those designated. The press-
men exercise the craft skills traditionally used in the printing industry
and are recognized as skilled workers by the Employer. There is
no interchange between the journeymen pressmen and the other job
classifications of the Employer. In view of these facts we find the
pressmen constitute a separate unit of the type the Board has his-
torically found appropriate.
The binders, finishers, and shippers constitute the remainder of the
production force. Their duties are to address, sort, stack, and mail
the materials after the imprinting has been done. They do not consti-
tute a craft unit. However, as a residual unit they may properly
constitute a separate appropriate unit.
No labor organization seeks to represent the overall unit, nor does
there appear to be any bargaining history involving any of these
employees. Therefore , as we found both units are appropriate, we
will direct separate elections as sought by the Petitioner in the follow-
ing units : 8
Group I-All pressmen, assistant pressmen, and apprentices en-
gaged in operations of printing presses, including but not limited to
gravure offset and letterpress, printing presses, and assistant devices.
Excluding composing room employees, binders, finishing, and ship-
ping employees, office clerical and professional employees, guards,
and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Group II-All employees engaged in bindery, finishing, and ship-
ping operations, excluding office clerical employees, the employees in
voting group I, typesetters, professional employees, guards, and super-
visors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein Siemons Mail-
ing Service , 122 NLRB 81
3 George H. Braun d/b/a Alamo -Braun Beef Company, 128 NLRB 32 ; Ballentine Pack-
ing Company, Inc., 132 NLRB 923; Trevellyan Oldsmobile Company, '133 NLRB 1272.