St. Louis Printing Pressmen, Etc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 20, 1965

155 N.L.R.B. 266 (N.L.R.B. 1965)

266 DECISIONS Or, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to a Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, as amended , we hereby notify our employees that:
WE WILL NOT interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of
their right to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargain-
ing or other mutual aid or protection, pertaining to their wages, hours, or work-
ing conditions, either by discharging employees for engaging in such activities,
threatening reprisals therefor, or in any other manner.
WE WILL offer to Aurea E. Ramirez immediate and full reinstatement to her
former or substantially equivalent position, without prejudice to any seniority or
other rights and privileges previously enjoyed, and make her whole for any
loss of pay she suffered as a result of our interference with her rights under
the Act.
CONTINENTAL MANUFACTURING CORP.,
Employer.
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, P.O. Box
11007, Fernandez Juncos Station, Santurce, Puerto Rico, Telephone No. 724-7171,
if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions.
St. Louis Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union No. 6, Inc.,
affiliated with International Printing Pressmen & Assistants
Union of North America, AFL-CIO and Nordmann Printing
Company. Case No. 14-CD-172. October 20, 1965
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a charge filed on June 15, 1964, by the Nordmann. Printing
Company (herein referred to as the Company), the General Counsel
of the National Labor Relations Board by the Regional Director for
Region 14, issued a complaint, dated May 10, 1965, against the St. Louis
Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union No. 6, Inc., affiliated with In-
ternational Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union of North Amer-
ica, AFL-CIO (herein referred to as Respondent), alleging that Re-
spondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices
affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (i) and (ii)
(D) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National. Labor Relations Act, as
amended. On June 15, 1965, copies of the complaint, the charge, and
a notice of hearing thereon were duly served upon the Respondent, the
Company, St. Louis Typographical Union No. 8, affiliated with Inter-
national Typographical Union, AFL-CIO (ITU herein), and upon
St. Louis Stereotypers Union No. S. affiliated with International Stere-
otypers & Elect.rophtters Union, AFL-CIO (Stereotypers herein).
155 NLRB No. 30.
ST. LOUIS PRINTING PRESSMEN, ETC. 267
More specifically, the complaint alleged that the Board had heard,
and on March 12, 1965, made a determination of, the dispute out of
which the charged unfair labor practice arose; that the determination
of the Board was that Respondent was not entitled to force or require
the Company to assign to employees represented by Respondent all off-
set preparatory work, exclusive of such work in connection with the
Multilith press, but including offset camera operations and all steps and
processes involved in offset plate making at the Company's plant in
St. Louis, Missouri ; that the Respondent had failed and refused, and
continues to fail and refuse, to comply with the Board's Decision and
Determination of Dispute; that Respondent, by means proscribed in
Section 8(b) (4), has engaged in conduct the object of which is, and
has been, to force and require the Company to assign the disputed work
described above to employees who are members of Respondent rather
than to employees who are members of ITU as the Board has deter-
mined; and that by such conduct Respondent has engaged in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (i) and (ii) (D)
of the Act.
On June 25, 1965, all parties filed a joint stipulation of facts in which
they petitioned for the transfer of this proceeding to the Board and
waived their rights to a hearing before a Trial Examiner, the making
of findings of facts and conclusions of law by a Trial Examiner, and
the issuance of the Trial Examiner's Decision and Recommended
Order. It was further stipulated that the entire record in this case
shall consist of the stipulation with attached exhibits which shall be
the sole and only evidence received and considered by the Board. On
June 30, 1965, the Board approved the stipulation, ordered this pro-
ceeding transferred to and continued before the Board for the issuance
of a Decision and Order, and granted any of the parties leave to file
with the Board a motion to dismiss the complaint, or, in the alterna-
tive, to file proposed findings of fact or conclusions of law, and briefs in
support thereof, on or before July 20, 1965. Thereafter, the General
Counsel filed proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law with
a supporting brief. The Respondent filed a memorandum in the nature
of a brief in support of its contention that the complaint should be
dismissed.
Pursuant to Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its pow-
ers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members
Fanning, Brown, and Jenkins].
Upon the basis of the aforesaid stipulation with attached exhibits,
the brief filed by the General Counsel, the Respondent's memorandum,
and the entire record in this case, the Board makes the following :
268 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDING OP FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The parties stipulated that the Company, a Missouri corporation,
has its sole office and printing facilities at St. Louis, Missouri, and is
engaged in the business of commercial and newspaper printing and
that it annually purchases goods valued in excess of $50,000 which are
shipped directly to it from points outside the State of Missouri. We
find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of Section 2(6) and ( 7) of the Act , and that it will effectuate the pur-
poses of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that the St. Louis Printing
Pressmen and Assistants Union No. 6, Inc., affiliated with Interna-
tional Printing Pressmen & Assistants Union of North America, AFL-
CIO (Respondent), St. Louis Typographical Union No. 8, affiliated
with International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO (ITU), and the
St. Louis Stereotypers' Union No. 8, affiliated with International Ster-
eotypers & Electrotypers' Union, AFL-CIO (Stereotypers), and their
affiliated locals herein , 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 ( 151 NLRB 628),
the Board determined that the Respondent was not lawfully entitled
to force or require the Employer to assign the work in dispute (consist-
ing of all preparatory work related to offset platemaking , including
camera operation, darkroom work, stripping, opaquing, and plate
burning) to members of the Respondent rather than to employees rep-
resented by the ITU, by means proscribed by Section 8(b) (4) (i) and
(ii) (D). The Board directed the Respondent to notify the Regional
Director for Region 14, in writing, with respect to its intention to coin-
ply with the Board's determination. On or about March 12, 1965, the
Respondent indicated that it did not intend so to comply.
As the Respondent has not complied with the 10(k) determination,
we must now consider the merits of complaint. All the factors essen-
tial to a finding of an 8(b) (4) (D) violation are present here. It is
clear that , on or about June 12, 1964 , the Respondent threatened to
cause its members to cease working for the Company with an object
of forcing or requiring the Company to assign the disputed work to
members of the Respondent rather than to employees represented by
the ITU. It is not contended that the Company was failing to conform
to an order or certification of the Board determining the bargaining
representative for employees performing the disputed work. The
ST. LOUIS PRINTING PRESSMEN, ETC. 269
arguments advanced here by Respondent are the same as those asserted
in the 10(k) proceedings. None of these arguments raises a meritori-
ous defense to the complaint now before the Board.
Accordingly, we conclude that the Respondent has violated Section
8(b) (4) (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 operation of the Company, has a close, intimate,
and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the sev-
eral States and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstruct-
ing 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, St. Louis Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union
No. 6, Inc., affiliated with International Printing Pressmen and Assist-
ants Union of North America, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
2. By threatening, coercing, or restraining the Company, Nordmann
Printing Company, which is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act, with an object of forcing or requiring the Company to
assign to members of Respondent rather than to employees represented
by the ITU the work of all preparatory work relating to offset plate-
making, including camera operation, darkroom work, stripping,
opaquing, and plate burning, 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) (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, and upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, St. Louis Print-
ing Pressmen and Assistants Union No. 6, Inc., affiliated with Inter-
national Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union of North America,
AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall :
1. Cease and desist from threatening, coercing, or restraining the
Nordmann Printing Company, its successors or assigns, where an
270 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
object thereof is to force or require the Nordmann Printing Company
to assign all preparatory work relating to offset platemaking, includ-
ing camera operation, darkroom work, stripping, opaquing, and plate
burning, to members of the Respondent rather than to employees rep-
resented by St. Louis Typographical Union No. 8, affiliated with Inter-
national Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, except insofar as such
conduct is permitted under Secion 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 in conspicuous places at its offices, meeting halls, and at all
places where the Respondent would normally post notices for members,
copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 1 Copies of the
notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for Region 14, shall,
after being duly signed by the Respondent's representative, be posted
immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by the Respond-
ent for 60 consecutive days thereafter. Reasonable steps shall be taken
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 14 for posting by the Nordmann Printing Com-
pany, 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 14, in writing, within
10 days from the date of this Order, what steps have been taken to
comply herewith.
'In 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 ST. Louis PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSIST-
ANTS UNION No. 6, INC., AFFILIATED WITII INTERNATIONAL PRINTING
PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS UNION OF NORTII AMERICA, 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 :
VVE WILL NOT threaten, coerce, or restrain Nordmann Printing
Company, its successors or assigns, where an object thereof is to
force or require the Nordmann Printing Company to assign to
members of the St. Louis Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union
No. 6, Inc., rather than to employees represented by St. Louis
Typographical Union No. 8, all preparatory work related to off-
THOMAS H. MARROW TRUCKING CO., ETC. 271
set platemaking, including camera operation, darkroom work,
stripping, opaquing, and plate burning, except insofar as any such
conduct is permitted under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act.
ST. Louis PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS
UNION No. 6, INC., AFFILIATED WITH INTER-
NATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSIST-
ANTS UNION or ]\ ORTH AMERICA, 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, 1520 Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri, Telephone No. 622-
4156, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance
with its provisions.
Thomas H. Marrow Trucking Co. and Chairman E. Stonebrook,
Petitioner, and Teamsters, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen &
Helpers Union Local No. 542 , International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen & Helpers of America.'
Case No. ?1-RD-763. October 20,1965
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer
Norman H. Greer. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hear-
ings are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. There-
after the Union filed briefs in support of its position.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the National
Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Fanning, Brown, and
Zagoria].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction
herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
i As amended at the hearing.
155 NLRB No. 29.