Premier-Southern Ticket Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 15, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 1129 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of PREMIER -SOUTHERN TICIiET COMPANY, INC. and CIN-
CINNATI PRINTING PRESSMEN 'S UNION No . 11 AFFILIATED WITH THE
INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS ' UNION OF
NORTH AMERICA , A. F. L.
Case No. 9-CA-106.-Decided March 15, 1950
DECISION
AND
ORDER
On December 16, 1949, Trial Examiner William F. Scharnikow is-
sued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding
that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain
unfair labor practices in violation of Section 8 (a) (1) and 8 (a) (3)
of the Act, as amended, and recommending that it cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the
copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the
Respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a
supporting brief.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The
rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter-
mediate Report, the Respondent's brief and exceptions, and the entire
record in the case and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and
recommendations of the Trial Examiner.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in the case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Premier-South-
ern Ticket Company, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio, and its officers, agents,
successors, and assigns, shall :
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Discouraging membership in Cincinnati Printing Pressmen's
Union No. 11, affiliated with the International Printing Pressmen and
1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this proceeding to a three-member panel
[Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Reynolds].
88 NLRB No. 210.
1129
1130 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Assistants' Union of North America, A. F. L., or in any other labor
organization of its employees, by discriminatorily discharging em-
ployees or by discriminating in any other manner in regard to their
hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment;
(b) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing
its employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to form
labor organizations, to join or assist Cincinnati Printing Pressmen's
Union No. 11, affiliated with the International Printing Pressmen and
Assistants' Union of North America, A. F. L., or any other labor or-
ganization, 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, or to refrain
from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such tight
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 George Reising immediate and full reinstatement to his
former position or to a substantially equivalent position without
prejudice to his seniority or other rights and privileges, and make him
whole for any loss of pay he may have suffered by reason of the Re-
spondent's discrimination against him, by payment to him of a suni
of money equal to that which he normally would 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 the period;
(b) Post at its plant in Cincinnati, Ohio, copies of the notice at-
tached to the Intermediate Report, marked Appendix A.2 Copies of
said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Ninth
Region, shall, after being duly signed by the Respondent's representa-
tive, be posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof
and maintained by it for 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 Respond-
ent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by
any other material;
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Ninth Region (Cincin-
nati, Ohio), in writing, within ten (10) days from the date of this
Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply therewith.
' Said notice ; however, shall be, and it hereby is, amended by striking from line 3 thereof
the words "The recommendations of a Trial Examiner" and substituting in lieu thereof the
words "A Decision and Order ." In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a
United States Court of Appeals , there shall be inserted before the words , "A DECISION
AND ORDER ," the words , "A DECREE OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
ENFORCING."
PREMIER-SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC . 1131
INTERMEDIATE REPORT AND RECOMMENDED ORDER
Mr. William A. MacGowan, for the General Counsel.
Mr. Robert G. McIntosh, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the Respondent.
Mr. John Woods, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the Union.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a charge duly filed on January 3, 1949, by Cincinnati Printing Pressmen's
Union No. 11, affiliated with the International Printing Pressmen and Assistants'
Union of North America, A. F. L., herein called the Union, the General Counsel
of the National Labor Relations Board,' by the Acting Regional Director for the
Ninth Region (Cincinnati, Ohio), issued a complaint dated August 19, 1949,
against Premier-Southern Ticket Company, Inc., of Cincinnati, Ohio, herein
called the Respondent, alleging that the Respondent had engaged in and was
engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended,2 herein called the Act. Copies of the complaint, the
charge, a notice of hearing, and an order postponing hearing were duly served
on the Respondent and the Union.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleges in substance :
(1) that, on or about November 1, 1948, and since that date, the Respondent in
violation of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act has interfered with, restrained, and
coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act (a) by interrogating its employees concerning their union affiliation,
their union activity, the instigation of the Union, and whether they would vote
for a union if they had a vote; (b) by expressing disapproval of unions to its
employees and threatening to close the plant before permitting a union to come
into the plant; and (e) by threatening its employees with reprisals for partici-
pation in union activity; and (2) that, in violation of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3)
of the Act, the Respondent on or about December 23, 1948, discharged employee
George Reising and has since failed and refused to reinstate him to his former
position because of his membership in, and his activity on behalf of the Union,
thereby discriminating in regard to his hire and tenure of employment in order
to discourage membership in the Union.
By way of answer to the complaint, the Respondent filed a "statement" ad-
mitting certain allegations of the complaint but denying the commission of any
unfair labor practices. In its "statement," the Respondent further asserts that
the discharge of George Reising was based upon his inefficiency as an employee
and damage which he caused to property belonging to the Respondent.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held in Cincinnati, Ohio, on September 27,
28, and 29, 1949, before the undersigned Trial Examiner, duly designated by the
Chief Trial Examiner. The General Counsel, the Respondent, and the Union
participated in the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing upon the
issues. At the conclusion of the General Counsel's case-in-chief, the undersigned
denied a motion by the Respondent to dismiss the complaint on the ground that
the proof that the Respondent had discriminatorily discharged George Reising
was not sufficient. At the conclusion of the case, the undersigned also denied
1 The General Counsel and his representative at the hearing are herein referred to as the
General Counsel ; and the National Labor Relations Board, as the Board.
2 Public Law 101, 80th Congress , Chapter 120, 1st Session.
1132 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
a motion made by the Respondent to strike from the record as hearsay all testi-
mony concerning statements allegedly made by Charles W. Zieber, Jr., the presi-
dent of the Respondent. The parties waived oral argument at the hearing.
Since the hearing, however, the undersigned has received briefs from the General
Counsel and the Respondent.
Upon the entire record in the case and from his observation of the witnesses,
the undersigned makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The Respondent, an Ohio corporation with its principal office and place of
business at Cincinnati, Ohio, is engaged in the printing of tickets, business forms,
and stationery. Its annual purchases of materials amount approximately to
$50,000 in value, about 50 percent of which is purchased outside the State of
Ohio and shipped to its plant in Cincinnati, Ohio. Its annual sales amount to
approximately $125,000 in value, about 60 percent of which is represented by
products shipped from the Respondent's plant in Cincinnati, Ohio, to points
outside the State of Ohio.
The undersigned finds that the Respondent is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Cincinnati Printing Pressmen's Union No. 11, affiliated with the International
Printing Pressmen and 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. Interference, restraint, and coercion
In October 1948, employee George Reising distributed among his fellow pro-
duction employees at the Respondent's plant, printed postcards which were pro-
vided by, and addressed to, the Printing Trades Unions of the American Federa-
tion of Labor, and which, when filled out by the employees, authorized the Print-
ing Trades Unions, which included the charging Union, to act as their bargaining
representative. Some, if not all of the employees, filled out and mailed these
cards.3 At the time of his distribution of these cards, Reising also discussed with
his fellow employees in the shop, the advisability of their thus authorizing the
Unions which constituted the Printing Trades Unions to represent them as their
collective bargaining agent, and then invited them all to attend a meeting with
International Representative Welshhans of the Union, and Representative Case
of the Bookbinders Union. Six or seven of the employees attended this meeting
which was held late in November or early in December 1948, and were introduced
to Welshhans and Case by Reising who thereupon outlined their dissatisfaction
with the working conditions in the Respondent's plant.
During the first week of December 1948, Welshhans and another union repre-
sentative visited the Respondent's plant and informed Charles W. Zieber, Jr.,
the president of the Respondent, that the Union had been selected by the em-
ployees to represent them. The Respondent entered into a stipulation with the
8 Cards filled out and mailed by employees James R. Stoutemyer, Robert Tauber, George
Reising, Fred Nurrenberg , Joseph Heim, Dean Murdock , and David Horner, were received
in evidence.
PREMIER-SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC . 1133
Union for a consent election to be held by the Board's Regional Director for the
purpose of determining whether the Respondent's employees wished to be repre-
sented by the Union. In accordance with the stipulation and the result of the
election which was held on December 28, 1948, the Regional Director thereafter
certified the Union as the representative of the Respondent's employees.
On the day that the union representatives visited President Zieber in the first
week of December or. within a few days thereafter, Zieber called into his office a
number of the employees and spoke to them about their interest in the Union.
He asked Compositor William C. Peake what he knew "about this Union business"
and who had started it, and then said to Peake, "I want you to know once and for
all there won't be any union in this shop. If you don't like the way things are
run around here, you can get the hell out. I will shut the place down before I
have a union." Zieber also asked Peake whether Compositor Maschmeier was
"in on" the Union and requested that Maschmeier be sent in to the office. When
Maschmeier came in, Zieber asked him whether he was a member of the Union
and told Maschmeier, too, that he would close the plant before he would have a
.union, and that if the employees did not like it, they could get out 4 On the same
day, Zieber also asked Pressman Dean Murdock if he had started "this union
business," and, if not, who had done so, adding that "it won't do him any good,"
that if the employees did not like the way the shop was being run, they could get
jobs elsewhere, and that he would rather close his plant than have a union tell
him what to do. At about the same time, Zieber told employee Olivia Regens-
burger during two shortly separated conversations, that he was surprised at her
"signing up for the Union," that he would not have the Union coming in and
telling him what to do, and then, that "I don't know what they are asking for."
To Pressman James R. Stoutemyer, too, Zieber repeated his general statement to
the effect that he did not want a union, and "would close the place down first."
Finally, Zieber, after asking Pressman Joseph Heim whether he had sent in a
union card and saying that he would close the plant rather than have outsiders
come in to tell him how to run his business, also told Heim that if they all stuck
with Reising long enough, they would starve to death.
Tjpon the foregoing evidence, the undersigned finds that the Respondent,
through President Zieber's questioning its employees concerning their activities
on behalf of the Union and threatening to close the plant if the Union organized
them, interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.
B. The discharge of George Reising
George Reising, whose efforts led to the employees' selection of the Union as
their bargaining representative, began working for the Respondent on July
4 The findings made in the text as to Zieber's interrogation of, and statements to, the
Respondent's employees are based in each case upon the credible-testimony of the employee.
On February 8, 1949, Zieber was adjudged insane and committed to a mental hospital by
an order of an Ohio Probate Court. On May 13, 1949, Zieber was permitted to return to
his home on a "trial visit." Zieber was not offered as a witness in the hearing in the present
case in the latter part of September 1949. Maschmeier's and Peake's testimony that they
had been interrogated as to their interest In the Union, was corroborated In the testimony
of Lester Boullie, the Respondent's treasurer, who said, however, that Zieber did not
threaten the closing of the plant. The findings In the following portions of the text as to
statements made by Zieber to other employees on the same day or within the next few days,
are based in each case on the uncontradicted, though uncorroborated, testimony of the
particular employee that such statements were made to him or to her by Zieber, no one else
being present at the time.
1134 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL. LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
15, 1946, as assistant to the shipping clerk. Shortly thereafter, he worked a
few months as the operator, first, of one of the Respondent's large presses and
.then of a small press known as the baby press. He then returned to the shipping
room where he worked as assistant to the shipping clerk and later on a paper
cutting machine. Finally, in August 1948, he was again assigned to the press-
room, where he operated the baby press on the night shift until his discharge
on December. 23, 1948.
The baby press is a flat press used for printing five tickets at a stroke on a
stream of paper which is automatically fed from a roll at one end and rerolled
.at the other end. In essence, the press itself consists of a combination of four
.vertical presses so arranged as to make three successive overlaying impressions
or printings on the upper surface of the paper for the faces of the tickets, and a
fourth and final impression on the underside of the paper, for the backs of the
tickets. In each of the four combined presses, the type is placed in a flat frame
known as a chase and firmly secured in position by wedges or quoins between
the type and the chase. The chase for each press is then put into the "head" of
,the press containing the ink rollers and rods which, on each stroke, thrust the
type in the chase against the paper on the beds of the press. Two kinds of
tickets are printed on this press: (1) special or theatre tickets, on which one
of the four presses is used to print the name of the customer-theatre on the face
of the ticket, and (2) stock tickets on which the customer's name does not appear
and which, therefore, do not require the use of one .of the four presses. Thus, in
stock tickets, three impressions at most are made and. one. of the four presses
is therefore idle.
On the night of December 21, 1948, the quoins came out of the chase on the
baby press shortly after Reising had started the press on the night shift. As a
result, the type fell out of the chase, the head and the type were smashed, the
gears on the head were broken, and the rods were bent. There was no super-
visor on. the night shift. Although Reising and Dean Murdock, a more ex-
perienced pressman operating another press on the same shift, tried for several
hours to fix the press, they were unsuccessful and Reising punched his time card
and went home early in the morning of December 22.
When the day shift reported later that morning, Murdock told Superintendent
Glenn Springer, who worked only on the day shift, that the quoins and type had
fallen out of the chase and that he had spent some time with Reising in an
unsuccessful attempt to fix the press. He did not, however, express, nor was he
asked for, any opinion as to whether the accident was Reising's fault. Springer
informed Lester Boullie, the Respondent's treasurer, of the accident, and Boullie,
in turn, notified President Zieber. Neither Springer, Boullie, nor Zieber ever
asked Reising, Murdock, or Joseph Heim, the only pressman who had been work-
ing that night, how the accident had happened. And; although Springer told
Boullie he thought it was Reising's fault, he made no recommendation as to
whether Reising should, be discharged or otherwise disciplined.
Receiving no warning that he was about to be discharged nor any opportunity
to explain his accident, Reising worked his regular shift on the baby press on
the night of December 22, and went home at the end of the shift on the morning
of December 23. That afternoon, however, the Respondent's porter delivered to
him at his home a letter from President Zieber stating that he was discharged
because of the accident and the damage to his press, and that he should surrender
his key to the plant to the bearer of the letter.
PREMIER-SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC. 1135
Although Reising never heard anything else from the Respondent concerning
his discharge, employee Fred Nurrenberg testified without contradiction, and
the undersigned credits his testimony, that on the day Reising was discharged,
President Zieber told Nurrenberg that he had discharged Reising ; that he didn't
want Reising "around there any more" ; that Reising's "vote would count for the
Union" in the coming representation election ; and that Reising had been "the
cause of the trouble."
But the Respondent, principally through the testimony of Boullie, denies this
explanation of Reising's discharge. Boullie testified that on December 22, the
day after Reising's accident, he told Zieber that he thought they should discharge
Reising because of the accident and a preceding "series of events" involving
Reising; that Zieber said they could not discharge Reising "on account of the
Union" ; that Boullie replied that he thought the Respondent certainly had the
right to discharge a man for "smashing up" a valuable piece of equipment ; and
that Boullie thereupon telephoned to the Respondent's attorney, but, being unable
to reach him that day, received confirmation of his belief that Reising might be
discharged, only on the following morning, December 23.
In thus attributing Reising 's discharge not only to the accident of December
21, but also to a preceding "series of events,". Boullie testified that he could not
recall whether he and Zieber had discussed the specific incidents which consti-
tuted the "series." He testified, however, that these earlier incidents were well
known both to him and to 'Lieber and consisted of the following: (1) Two acci-
dents in October 1948 which damaged Reising 's baby press during his operation
and which were caused, like the accident of December 21, by the loosening of
quoins in the chase; ( 2) a mix-up in routing of printed material to customers
caused by Reising while he was working in the shipping room, apparently in the
late spring or early summer of 1948; (3) the spoiling of tickets through offset
printing, due to excessive inking, which occurred early in 1948; 5 (4) drinking
on two occasions when Foreman Springer sent him home from work ; (5) criticism
of the low production of employees on the night shift before he, himself, was
assigned to that shift in August 1948; and (6) failures to punch his time card
upon starting work on three occasions , the first in September 1947, and the second
and third in December 1948, just before his discharge.
Laying aside for the moment Reising's accident of December 21, 1948, and
his similar accidents in October 1948, the undersigned does not believe, upon
the evidence before him, that the Respondent's consideration of the other earlier
incidents contributed to its decision to discharge Reising. The mix-up in
routing and the spoiling of the tickets by offset printing were isolated instances
of mistakes which were not serious nor chronic, which occurred long before
the discharge, and which, according to the credible testimony of Reising, were
not made the basis of any reprimand or warning at the time. Similarly, it
appears that the occasions when Reising was sent home for drinking were
before August 1948, at least 4 months before the discharge, and that Reising
gave the Respondent no later cause for objection on this score.° As for
Reising's alleged criticism of the low production of other employees and his
5 Reising testified that although he was working regularly in the shipping room at the
time, he had been assigned for a day or two to the operation of one of the presses.
6 Although neither Springer nor Boullie was able to fix the time of these incidents in his
testimony , Reising himself credibly testified that he stopped drinking in August when he
joined Alcoholics Anonymous and employee Olivia Regensburger, whose complaint led to
Reising ' s being sent home, testified that she noticed only once that Reising was under the
influence of liquor, and that was shortly after Reising had been employed by the Respondent.
1136 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
failure to punch in on his time card on three occasions in 21/2 years of employ-
ment, they are not the sort of things that prompt an employer to discharge an
employee . Moreover , Reising testified , and the undersigned credits his testimony,
that he was not reprimanded for his failure to punch his time card and that,
as a matter of fact, it was Zieber , and not Reising, who suggested that Reising
work in the pressroom to check the other employees ' production.
There remains the final question : Did the Respondent discharge Reising,
as the Respondent contends , because Reising failed to keep the quoins tight in
the chase and thus caused two breakdowns of the baby press in October and
a third breakdown on December 21, 1948? Or , did the Respondent discharge
Reising, as the General Counsel contends , because he was the leader of the
movement to organize its employees?
The facts in the case strongly indicate that the Respondent discriminatorily
discharged Reising. As has already been found , Reising, who had started and
was leading the attempt of the Respondent 's employees to secure representation
by the Union , was discharged less than a week before the representation
election was held. Just before his discharge , President Zieber of the Respond-
ent not only questioned Reising's fellow employees about the leadership and
support of the union movement among them and threatened to close the plant
rather than permit the Union to tell him what to do, but, in the course of doing
so, also told Pressman Heim that if they stuck with Reising, they would starve
to death. Then , after Reising 's discharge , Zieber told employee Nurrenberg
in substance that Reising had been discharged because he had been "the cause
of the ( union ) trouble," and "his vote would count for the Union" in the
election . Finally, the Respondent 's attempt in the present proceeding to justify
Reising 's discharge in part upon remote and inconsequential incidents which
obviously had no reasonable bearing upon the much later decision to discharge
him, indicates an intention to conceal the actual reason for the discharge.
In contrast , the record provides weak support for the Respondent 's conten-
tion that it discharged Reising because of three similar accidents on the baby
press in October and December 1948. The undersigned . does find, upon Fore-
man Springer 's testimony , that the baby press, while being operated by Reising
on the night shift, broke down on two occasions in October , as well as on
December 21, and that the accident in each instance was caused by loosening
of the quoins in the chase .' The undersigned also finds , as Press Operator
Murdock and Boullie testified , that, almost 3 years before Reising was dis-
charged, the Respondent discharged Tony Greco, another operator , after Greco
had such an accident . But, in the factual setting of the present case, these
facts are not sufficient to overcome the strong evidence of the Respondent's
discrimination against Reising.
7 This finding is made in spite of some doubt raised by Reising's testimony as to whether
the accidents in October occurred during his operation of the baby press on the night shift
or during its operation by someone else on the day shift . Reising testified on direct
examination that he had no serious breakdown in October 1948 , nor, for that matter, until
December 21, but that , in October 1948 , there had been a breakdown on the baby press
while it was being operated by either John Decker or Robert Tauber on the day shift, and
that, as a result , one of the four presses in the combination was down for a few weeks,
during which he was able to print only stock tickets . When asked on cross -examination,
ho*ever, whether the quoins had come loose and the type had been smashed during his
operation of the press on October 8, and again on October 10, Reising said that he could
not remember without referring to his own production reports for those days . The produc-
tion reports of the operators for the period prior to November 1, 1948, had not been pre-
served by the Respondent and were, therefore , not available.
PREMIER-SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC. 1137
Neither Springer's testimony nor any other evidence in the record justifies
a finding that, at the time of the October accidents, Foreman Springer either
took Reising to task or cautioned him to be careful in the future. Reising
testified merely that he did not remember that Springer had given him any such
caution in or after October. And, although Springer at first testified that when
the October accidents occurred, he cautioned Reising to be very careful about
locking the type tightly in the chase, and showed him how to do it, he later
testified that he said nothing at all to Reising after the first October breakdown ;
that when he came to work on the morning after the second accident, either
he spoke to Reising, or, if Reising had already gone home, he left a note for
him that night; that he did speak to Reising the second morning following the
second October accident and told Reising to be careful, but that he did not
remember whether he then also spoke to Reising about the first accident, whether
Reising said anything at all, or "what we talked about." The uncertainties and
vacillations in Springer's testimony and the fact that Reising did not remember
receiving any warning or caution from Springer in October, impel the under-
signed to find that Springer did not caution Reising at that time.
Nor, in the face of the strong evidence of discrimination against Reising,
does the mere occurrence of three similar accidents during his operation of the
baby press, satisfactorily explain why Reising was summarily discharged with-
out investigation of whether he was actually at fault and without affording him
an opportunity to explain. In this connection, the undersigned rejects the testi-
mony of Foreman Springer that all such accidents in which quoins fall out of
the chase are clearly the fault of the operator. Instead, as proof of possible
explanations of the accident of which Springer and the Respondent must have
been aware but did not investigate, the undersigned credits the testimony of
Reising and Murdock that quoins may be loosened by the vibration of the press
and that the baby press was in such bad condition throughout the fall of 1948
that there were numerous breakdowns.
. Finally, the evidence concerning Greco's discharge in 1946 shows that, although
he was discharged after an accident in which his press broke down because of the
loosening of the quoins, the accident was not the only reason for his discharge.'
Indeed, that the Respondent does not ordinarily discharge operators because of
this type of accident or even its repetition (and certainly not summarily) is
apparent from the credible testimony given by Press Operators Murdock, Nurren-
berg, Stoutemyer, Decker, Tauber, and Henn that each of them had one or more
such accidents while operating the baby press and some of the larger presses;
that in these cases the type had also been smashed; that after these accidents,
some of these men had been cautioned by Foreman Springer to be sure that the
quoins were tight; but that none of them had been disciplined or warned of
discharge.
Upon the foregoing considerations, the undersigned concludes that the
Respondent discharged Reising because of his leadership in organizing its em-
ployees rather than for any of the reasons given by Boullie in his testimony. No
other conclusion is possible in view of the cumulative force of (1) President
Zeiber's remarks to the employees before Reising's discharge; (2) his later
8 In a letter, dated March 4, 1946, in which he explained low production to a principal
stockholder and customer, President Zieber of the Respondent referred to the "terrible
shape" of the Respondent's presses and also Greco's recent accident and discharge. Speak-
ing of Greco's discharge in this letter, 'Lieber said, "We finally let him go. He has been the
fly in the ointment for some time. . . [Emphasis supplied.]
1138 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
4 statement to Nurrenberg ascribing Reising's discharge to his being "the cause"of
the (union) trouble" ; (3) the Respondent's attempt in the present proceeding
to justify the discharge in part upon grounds that obviously had no reasonable
relation to the much later discharge ; (4) the fact that Reising was summarily
discharged without opportunity to defend himself or any investigation of whether
he was actually at fault; and (5) the fact that the accidents for which he was
ostensibly discharged have not ordinarily been made the basis for discharging
other employees. The undersigned, therefore, finds that the'Respondent in viola-
tion of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act discriminated against Reising by
discharging him on December 23, 1948, because of his activities on behalf of the
Union, thereby discouraging membership in the Union and interfering with,
restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
in Section 7 of the Act.
Iv. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondent set forth in Section III, above, occurring in.
connection with the operations of the Respondent 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. THE REMEDY
Since it has been found that the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act, the under-
signed will recommend that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action in order to effectuate the policies of the Act.
The undersigned has found that the Respondent discriminated against George
Reising in regard to his hire and tenure of employment thereby discouraging
membership in the Union, a labor organization. -It will be recommended that
the Respondent offer George Reising immediate and full reinstatement to his
former position or a substantially equivalent position,' without prejudice to
his seniority or other rights and privileges; and that the Respondent also make
the said George Reising whole for any loss of earnings suffered by him by reason
of the Respondent's discrimination against him, by payment to him of a sum of
money equal to that which lie would normally have earned as wages from the
date of the discrimination against him, December 23, 1948, to the date of the
offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings during that period.30
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the
case, the undersigned makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Cincinnati Printing Pressmen ' s Union No . 11, affiliated with the Inter-
national Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America , A. F. L.,
is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of George
Reising , and thereby discouraging membership in Cincinnati Printing Press-
men's Union No. 11, affiliated with the International Printing Pressmen and
B See The Chase National Bank of th e City of New York, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Branch,
65 NLRB 827.
10 Crossett Lumber Co., 8 NLRB 440, 497-498.
PREMIER-SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC. 1139
Assistants' Union of North America, A. F. L., the Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a)
(1) and (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 has engaged
in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a)
(1) of the Act.
4. The aforesaid 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 above findings of fact and conclusions of law, the
undersigned hereby recommends that the Respondent, Premier. Southern Ticket
Company, Inc., of Cincinnati, Ohio, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall :
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Discouraging membership in Cincinnati Printing Pressmen's Union No.
11, affiliated with the International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union
of North America, A. P. L., or in any other labor organization of its employees,
by discriminatorily discharging employees or by discriminating in any other
manner in regard to their hire or tenure of employment or any term or condi-
tion of employment ;
(b) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its em-
ployees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to form labor organi-
zations, to join or assist Cincinnati Printing Pressmen's Union No. 11, affiliated
with the International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North
America, 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 purpose 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 organi-
zation as a condition of employment, as authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the
Act, as guaranteed in Section 7 thereof.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the undersigned finds will.
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Offer to George Reising immediate and full reinstatement to his former
position or to a substantially equivalent position without prejudice to his senior-
ity or other rights and privileges, and make him whole for any loss of pay he
may have suffered by reason of the' discrimination of the Respondent against
him by payment to him of a sum of money equal to that which he normally would
have earned from the Respondent from the date of the Respondent's discrimina-
tion against him to the date of the offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings
-during the period;
(b) Post at its plant in Cincinnati, Ohio, copies of the notice attached hereto
and marked Appendix A. Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional
Director of the Ninth Region, shall, after being duly signed by the Respondent,
be posted by it inimediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it for
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 said notices are not altered, defaced, or
covered by any other material;
882191-51-73
1140 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Ninth 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 with the foregoing recommendations.
It is further recommended that, unless the Respondent shall, within twenty
(20) days from the receipt of this Intermediate Report, notify the Regional
Director for the Ninth Region in writing that it will comply with the foregoing
recommendations, the National Labor Relations Board issue an order requiring
the Respondent to take the action aforesaid.
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, Washington 25, D. C.,
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 or proceeding (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. Immedi-
ately 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 mimeo-
graphed shall be double spaced. Proof of service on the other parties of all
papers filed with the 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 trans-
ferring 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, conclusions,
and order, and all objections thereto shall be deemed waived for all purposes.
Dated at Washington, D. C., this 16th day of December 1949.
WILLIAM F. SCHARNIKOW,
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 employees
in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to form labor organizations,
to join or assist CINCINNATI PRINTING PRESSMEN'S UNION No. 11, affiliated
With the INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION OF
NORTH AMERICA, A. F. L., or any other labor organization, to bargain collec-
tively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in con-
certed activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual
PREMIER -SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC. 1141
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 mem-
bership in a labor organization as a condition of employment , as authorized
in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act, as guaranteed in Section 7 thereof.
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.
George Reising
All our employees are free to become, remain , or refrain from becoming members
of CINCINNATI PRINTING PRESSMEN ' S UNION No. 11 , affiliated with the INTER-
NATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS ' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA , A. F. L.,
or any other labor organization , except to the extent that the right to refrain may
be affected by a lawful agreement requiring membership in a labor organization
as a condition of employment . 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 organi-
zation.
PREMIER-SOUTHERN TICKET COMPANY, INC.,
E'm'ployer.
By-------------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
Dated----------------------------
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must
not be altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.