St. Louis Lithographing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 8, 1955

114 N.L.R.B. 24 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

24 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL. LABOIr RELATIONS BOARD
statute, which defect in the-contract was not cured prior to the filing
of the petition,' we find the contract herein no bar to this proceeding.
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find, as stipulated by the parties, that the following employees
of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All production and maintenance employees, including janitors,
truckers, and sweepers employed by the Employer at its Gowanda,
New York, plant, but excluding executives, foremen, subforemen or
strawbosses, office clerical employees, guards, and supervisors as defined
in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election` omitted from publication.]
e Cf. New Idea, Division of Avoo Manufacturing Corporation , 106 NLRB 1104. The case
of G. Mathes, Division of Lewin-Mathes Company, 105 NLRB 911 , relied upon by the
Intervenor, is not in point , inasmuch as in that case it appears that the defect of non-
compliance was cured before the Board proceeding commenced.
7 We shall, based upon its alleged contractual interest , permit the Meat Cutters to
appear on the ballot . A. Siegel & Sons, Inc., 94 NLRB 471 at 472-473; Pacific Tankers, Inc.,
81 NLRB 325 at 326. In the absence of any showing that confusion will result from
allowing the Meat Cutters to appear on the ballot jointly with its Local 34, a complying
local union, we shall so designate the Meat Cutters on the ballot in harmony with the
motion for substitution referred to heretofore . See General Motors Corporation, 88 NLRB
450 at 457-458.
St. Louis Lithographing Company and Local #5, Amalgamated
Lithographers of America , CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 14-RC-
2788. September 8,1955
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph H. Solien, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees 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 Employer is a Missouri corporation engaged in the business
of producing printed materials by the lithographic process at its plant
located in St. Louis, Missouri. The Petitioner seeks a unit of litho-
114 NLRB No. 9.
e,` ' : ST. LOUIS LITHOGRAPHING COMPANY 25
graphic production workers limited to offset press operators and feed-
ers, platemakers, and a cameraman. The Employer agrees that a unit
of lithographic production workers is appropriate, but contends that
such a unit should include cutters, a varnisher, an embosser, and an
artist. There is no history of collective bargaining for any of the Em-
ployer's employees.
The Employer's production employees are divided into six depart-
ments.' The Employer's president supervises the art, camera, plate-
making, and press departments, while its vice president supervises the
finishing, and the varnishing and embossing departments. The cut-
ters, the varnisher, and the embosser work in close proximity to the
pressmen.
The cutters: The two cutters are part of the finishing department.
One cutter operates a cutting machine exclusively, while the other oc-
casionally sets up dies in a label cutting machine. These employees cut
approximately 90 percent of the lithographic products printed. They
also cut approximately 10 percent of the paper stock before it is run
-off on the lithographic presses. These employees do not work on the
lithographic presses, nor do they interchange with the other litho-
graphic employees requested by the Petitioner.
The varnisher and the embosser: The varnisher and the embosser
sought to be included in the lithographic unit by the Employer are
in the varnishing and embossing department. The varnishing opera-
tion consists of coating sheets of label paper, which have been fully
printed, with a varnish which adds a high gloss to the printed surface
and affords some protection for the finished label. The embossing
operation is also performed after the sheets have been lithographically
printed, and is in the nature of a pressing of the paper which results
in the raising of certain areas, giving the finished product a richer
appearance than an ordinary, flat sheet of paper.
The embosser works exclusively on the embossing machine, while
the varnisher spends most of his time operating the varnishing ma-
chine and the remainder in cutting and embossing. The type of var-
nishing performed on the varnishing machine is known as "spirit
varnishing," and does not require the use of lithographic plates. A
certain amount of varnishing is also performed by the pressmen on
the lithographic presses. One type of "press varnishing" consists of
varnishing the entire sheet. In this operation, the water rollers are
removed from the press and the usual water, acid, or etch which is
normally applied to the lithographic plate is not used. A second type
' These departments and the employee complement in each are as follows : art depart-
ment-1 employee ; camera department-1 employee ; platemaking department-2 em-
ployees ; press department-10 employees ; finishing department-8 employees ; and var-
nishing and embossing department-3 employees . The Employer also employs 5 salesmen,
a porter and janitor, and 3 clericals.
26 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of press varnis'hing is known as "spot varnishing," where the water
rollers and lithographic plates prepared by the platemakers are used.
The varnisher and the embosser do not work on lithographic presses,
nor do they interchange with other lithographic employees.
The artist: The artist testified at the hearing that he considers him-
self to be both a lithographic and a commercial artist. The record
shows, however, that lie spends between 90 and 95 percent of his time
in creative art work, such as is usually done by commercial artists.
Approximately 1 percent of his time is spent in such lithographic art
activities as dot etching and work on continuous tone negatives, while
the remainder is'spent in stripping and opaquing work. The record
further shows that practically all process art work normally per-
formed by lithographic artists is sent to an outside concern.
The Board has frequently considered the skills and techniques inci-
dent to the lithographic process and has held' that all employees en-
gaged in that process form a cohesive unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining.2 However, the Board has consistently ex-
cluded from the traditional lithographic unit cutters such as are here
involved.' Accordingly; we shall exclude the cutters herein.
As to the embosser and the varnisher, we do not believe that their
work is so intimately connected with the lithographic process as to
warrant their inclusion in the unit sought by Petitioner. While the
work of the varnisher is similar to the press varnishing operation per-
formed by the pressmen, it.does not involve the use of the lithographic
presses or plates as does press varnishing.4 Furthermore, these em-
ployees do not interchange with those in the traditional lithographic
classifications, nor is there job progression for them from one process
to the other. Accordingly, we shall exclude the embosser and the var-
nisher from the unit found appropriate.
As it is apparent from the record that the artist spends the major
portion of his time in work of the type normally performed by com-
mercial artists, we shall also exclude him.'
Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer
at its St. Louis, Missouri, plant constitute a unit appropriate for pur-
2 Cf. Diamond Printing Company, 109 NLRB 112; Fey Publishing Company, 108 NLRB
1031.
3 Campbell Offset Printing Company, 92 NLRB 1421; The Madison Company, 92 NLRB
914
d See Continental Can Company, Inc, 110 NLRB 1042, 105 NLRB 210; Heektin Can
Company, 97 NLRB 783, 89 NLRB 717. In those cases, the Board excluded from litho-
graphic units employees classified as "coaters" who operated enameling machines, an
operation analogous to that of varnishing
The Employer cites Continental Can Company, Inc., 105 NLRB 210, as a precedent for
including in a lithographic unit an employee engaged in a varnishing operation. There,
however, the employee in question also operated a lithographic press.
iJosten Manufacturing Company, 101 NLRB 189. The Employer cites Johnston Prsnt-
ing Company, 92 NLRB 1426, as authority for including commercial artists in the unit.
There, however, the Board pointed out that approximately 75 percent of the artists' time
was spent on work connected with the lithographic process.
SEATTLE DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS 27
poses of collective bargaining. within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of
the Act :
All lithographic production ., employees, , including pressmen and
feeders, platemakers, and the, camerman, but excluding cutters, the
varnisher, the embosser, clerical employees, professional employees,
the artist, all other employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Seattle District Council of Carpenters , affiliated with' United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL;
Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers, Local Union No. 174,
International ' Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware-
housemen and Helpers of America , AFL; International Union
of Operating Engineers , Local 302, AFL; and Local 440, Inter-
national Hod Carriers , Building and Common Laborers'
Union of America, AFL i and Cisco Construction Company.
Case No. 19-CC-792. September 9, 1955
DECISION AND ORDER
On March 25, 1955, Trial Examiner Howard Myers issued his In-
termediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondents z had engaged in certain unfair labor practices within
the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (A) of the Act, and recommending
that they cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative ac-
tion, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report attached
hereto. Thereafter, the Respondents filed exceptions to the Inter-
mediate Report and supporting briefs.
The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
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 exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the
case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommenda-
tions of the Trial Examiner, with the exceptions, modifications, and
additions noted below.
i At the hearing, the General Counsel 's motion to dismiss the complaint against Western
Washington District Council, International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers'
Union of America, AFL, was granted without objection.
' Seattle District Council of Carpenters , affiliated with United Brotherhood of Carpenters
and Joiners of America, AFL; Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers , Local Union No. 174,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and Helpers of Amer-
ica, AFL ; Local 440• International Hod Carriers , Building and Common Laborers' Union
of America , AFL, and International Union of Operating Engineers , Local 302 , are herein
individually referred to as Respondents Carpenters , Local 174, Local 440, and Local 302,
respectively , and collectively referred to as Respondents.
114 NLRB No. 12.
i