N. Haven, Meriden & B'port Electrotypers No. 83

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 12, 1966

156 N.L.R.B. 776 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

776 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices it will be
recommended that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action
to effectuate the policies of the Act.
It will be recommended that the Respondent offer to employees Noah Eddy, John
Brethauer, Shirley Davis, and Ruie Perry immediate and full reinstatement to their
former or substantially equivalent positions, without prejudice to their seniority or
other rights and privileges. It will also be recommended that the Respondent make
them whole for any loss of earnings they may have suffered by reason of the dis-
crimination against them, by payment to each of them of a sum of money equal to that
which he or she would have earned as wages from the date of the discrimination
to the date of the offer of reinstatement, less net earnings during said period, and in
a manner prescribed by the Board in F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289, and
with interest on the backpay due in accordance with Board policy set out in Isis
Plumbing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716.
It will also be recommended that, upon request, the Respondent bargain collectively
and in good faith with the Charging Union and, if an understanding is reached,
embody such understanding in a signed agreement.
In view of the serious and extended nature of the Respondent's unfair labor prac-
tices it will be recommended that it cease and desist from infringing in any manner
upon the rights of employees guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record in the
case, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Food Store Employees Union, Local #347, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and
Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
2. By discriminating against employees, as described herein, to discourage mem-
bership in and activity on behalf of the above-named labor organization, the Respond-
ent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8(a) (3) of the Act.
3 All employees at the Respondent's Parkersburg, West Virginia, store, excluding
office clerical employees, guards, professional employees, and all supervisors as
defined by the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.
4. By virtue of Section 9(a) of the Act the above-named labor organization has
been since October 22, 1964, and now is, the exclusive bargaining representative of
all employees in the above-described appropriate unit.
5. By failing and refusing to bargain with the said labor organization the Respond-
ent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8(a) (5) of the Act.
6. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees in the exercise of rights
guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a) (1) of the Act.
7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommended Order omitted from publication 1
New Haven , Meriden & Bridgeport Electrotypers Union No. 83,
International Stereotypers and Electrotypers Union , AFL-CIO
and Meredith Printing Company (West Haven Plant ) and New
Haven Typographical Union , No. 47, International Typographi-
cal Union , AFI-CIO. Case No. 1-CD-95. January 12,1966
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a charge filed on January 19, 1965, by Meredith Printing
Company (West Haven plant) (herein referred to as the Company),
156 NLRB No. 76.
N. HAVEN, MERIDEN & B'PORT ELECTROTYPERS NO. 83 777
the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the
Regional Director for Region 1, issued a complaint dated
August 16, 1965, against the New Haven, Meriden & Bridgeport
Electrotypers Union No. 83, International Stereotypers and Electro-
typers Union, AFL-CIO, (herein referred to as the Respondent),
alleging that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in
unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8(b) (4) (ii) (D) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended. In substance the Respondent was alleged to have violated
the Act by threatening a work stoppage against the Employer in
order to force the Employer to assign certain work to the Electro-
typers rather than to employees represented by the New Haven Typo-
graphical Union No. 47, International Typographical Union,
AFL-CIO (herein called the Typographers).
After a proceeding pursuant to Section 10(k), the Board sub-
sequently issued its Decision and Determination of Dispute (153
NLRB 1443) in which the Board concluded that employees represented
by the Typographers were entitled to perform the work in dispute-
i.e., the mounting and blocking of illustrations in the Employer's
West Haven, Connecticut, plant-rather than employees represented
by the Electrotypers. Thereafter, by letter dated August 2, 1965,
the Respondent advised the Regional Director for Region 1 that it
will not comply with the Board's Decision, whereupon the afore-
mentioned complaint was issued on August 16, 1965.
On October 29, 1965, the parties involved herein and the General
Counsel entered into a stipulation waiving a hearing before a TriaL
Examiner, the making of findings of fact and conclusions of law by a
Trial Examiner, and the issuance of a Trial Examiner's Decision,
and agreed to submit this case for findings of fact, conclusions of law,
and an order directly by the Board. The parties further stipulated
that the charge, complaint, and notice of hearing, the transcript of
testimony and exhibits in the prior 10(k) proceeding conducted on
February 4 and March 16, 1965, and Exhibit 1 attached to the stipula-
tion, constitute the entire record in the case. On November 3, 1965,
pursuant to motion of the General Counsel, the Board issued an order
approving the stipulation and transferred the case to itself. There-
after, the General Counsel and the Respondent filed briefs.
Pursuant to Section 3(b) of the Act, as amended, the Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Fanning, Brown, and Jenkins].
778 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the basis of the aforesaid stipulation with the attached exhibit,
the briefs filed by the General Counsel and the Respondent, and the
entire record in this case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Employer is a printing company which maintains its principal
office in Des Moines, Iowa, and operates a composing room facility at
West Haven, Connecticut. The Employer ships from its West Haven
plant directly to plants located outside the State of Connecticut, prod-
ucts valued in excess of $420,000 per annum. The parties stipulated,
and we find, that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that it will effectuate
the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
H. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that the New Haven, Meriden
& Bridgeport Electrotypers Union No. 83, International Stereotypers
and Electrotypers Union, AFL-CIO, and New Haven Typographical
Union No. 47, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, are
labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE RESPONDENT 'S UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
In our Decision and Determination of Dispute, supra, the Board
determined that the Respondent was not lawfully entitled to force
or require the Employer to assign the work in dispute (mounting and
blocking of illustrations in the Employer's West Haven plant) to
members of the Respondent, rather than to typographers represented
by the Typographers Union by means proscribed by Section 8 (b)
(4) (D). The Board directed the Respondent to notify the Regional
Director for Region 1, in writing, with respect to its intention to
comply with the Board's determination. The Respondent, by letter
dated August 2, 1965, advised the Regional Director that it did not
intend to so comply.
As the Respondent has not complied with the 10(k) determination,
we must now consider the merits of the complaint. All the factors
essential to a finding of an 8(b) (4) (ii) (D) violation are present
here. It is uncontroverted that, on or about January 13, 1965, the
Respondent threatened to cause its members to cease working for
the Employer with an object of forcing or requiring the Employer
to assign the disputed work to members of the Respondent rather
than to employees represented by the Typographers. It is not con-
N. HAVEN, MERIDEN & B'PORT ELECTROTYPERS NO. 83 7791
tended that the Company was failing to conform to an order or
certification of the Board determining the bargain mg representative
of the employees performing the disputed work. The arguments,
advanced here by Respondent are the same as those asserted in, the
10 (k) proceedings and we find them lacking in merit.
Accordingly, we conclude that the Respondent has violated Section.
8(b) (4) (ii) (D) of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The conduct of the Respondent, as set forth above, occurring in
connection with the Employer's operations, has a close, intimate, and
substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several
States and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing
commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices, we shall order it to cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the purposes of
the Act.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Respondent, New Haven, Meriden & Bridgeport Electrotypers
Union No. 83, International Stereotypers and Electrotypers Union,
AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section
2(5) of the Act.
2. By threatening, coercing, or restraining the Employer, Meredith
Printing Company (West Haven plant) which is engaged in com-
merce within the meaning of the Act, with an object of forcing or
requiring the Company to assign to members of Respondent, rather
than to typographers represented by New Haven Typographical Union
No. 47, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, the work of
mounting and blocking illustrations at the Employer's West Haven
plant , the members of Respondent not being lawfully entitled to
perform such work, the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (ii) (D) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices affect commerce within
the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act,, as
amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the
780 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondent , New Haven , Meriden & Bridgeport Electrotypers Union
No. 83, International Stereotypers and Electrotypers Union, AFL-
CIO, its officers , agents, and representatives shall :
1. Cease and desist from threatening , coercing , or restraining
Meredith Printing Company, where an object thereof is to force or
require Meredith Printing Company to assign mounting and blocking
of illustrations in its West Haven plant to members of the Respondent
rather than to employees represented by New Haven Typographical
Union No. 47 , International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, except
insofar as such conduct is permitted under Section 8(b) (4) (D) of
the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the purposes of the Act :
(a) Post at its offices and meeting halls in New Haven , Connecticut,
copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix ." 1 Copies of said
notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for Region 1, shall,
after being duly signed by the Respondent 's representative , be posted
immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60
consecutive days thereafter , in conspicuous places, including all places
where notices to members are customarily posted. Reasonable steps
shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Sign and mail sufficient copies of said notice to the Regional
Director for Region 1 for posting by Meredith Printing Company,
West Haven plant , if it is willing , at all locations upon the premises
where notices to its employees are customarily posted.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 1, in writing , within
10 days from the date of this Order, what steps have been taken to
comply herewith.
IIn the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals , there shall be substituted for the words "a Decision and Order" the words "a
Decree of the United States Court of Appeals , Enforcing an Order "
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF NEW HAVEN, MERIDEN & BRIDGEPORT
ELECTROTYPERS UNION No. 83, INTERNATIONAL STEREOTYPERS AND
ELECTROTYPERS UNION, AFL-CIO
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 you that :
WE WILL NOT threaten, coerce, or restrain Meredith Printing
Company (West Haven plant), where an object thereof is to
force or require Meredith Printing Company (West Haven plant)
to assign to members of New Haven, Meriden & Bridgeport
BENSON VENEER COMPANY, INC. 781
Electrotypers Union No. 83, International Stereotypers and
Electrotypers Union, AFL-CIO, rather than to employees rep-
resented by New Haven Typographical Union No. 47, Inter-
national Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, all mounting and
blocking of illustrations in the Employer's West Haven, Con-
necticut, plant, except insofar as any such conduct is permitted
under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act.
NEW HAVEN, MERIDEN & BRIDGEPORT ELECTROTYPERS
UNION No. 83, INTERNATIONAL STEREOTYPERS AND
ELECTROTI'PERS UNION, AFL-CIO,
Labor Organization.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60. consecutive days from the
date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered,by any
other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board' s Regional
Office, Boston Five Cents. Savings Bank Building, 24 School Street,
Boston, Massachussetts Telephone No. 223-3358, if they have any
questions concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions.
Benson Veneer Company , Inc. and Local Union No . 2089, United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America , AFL-CIO.
Cases Nos. 11-CA-?383, 11-CA-2446, 11-CA-2513, and 11-RC-
1949. January 1 2, 1966
DECISION AND. ORDER .
On September 16, 1965, Trial Examiner Lee J. Best issued his
Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and
recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Deci-
sion . The Trial Examiner further found merit in certain objections
by the Union to the election conducted on August 27, 1964, and recom-
mended that the election be set aside and that Case No. 11-RC-1949
be served from this proceeding and remanded to the Regional Director
for such action as he may deem proper with respect to directing a new
election. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial
Examiner's Decision. The General Counsel filed exceptions and sup-
plemental exceptions to certain of the Trial Examiner's findings and
supporting briefs.
156 NLRB No. 74.