The Brunswick News Publishing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 16, 1972

198 N.L.R.B. 943 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

THE BRUNSWICK NEWS PUBLISHING CO. 943
The Brunswick News Publishing Co. and Thomas J.
Barbarie
The Brunswick News Publishing Co. and Dona W.
Barbarie . Cases 10-CA-9157-1 and
10-CA-9157-2
August 16, 1972
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND PENELLO
introduce evidence pertinent to the issues, and to engage in
oral argument. Subsequent to the close of hearing, timely
briefs were filed by counsel for the General Counsel and
the Respondent.
Upon the entire record in this case, and from my
observation of the witnesses, and their demeanor on the
witness stand, and upon substantial, reliable evidence
"considered along with the consistency and inherent
probability of testimony" (Universal Camera Corp. v.
N.L.R.B. 340 U.S. 474, 496), I make the following:
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
On April 14, 1972, Trial Examiner Wellington A.
Gillis issued the attached Decision in this proceed-
ing. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions, the
General Counsel filed exceptions and a supporting
brief, and Respondent filed a brief in opposition to
the General Counsel's exceptions.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the record and the Trial
Examiner's Decision in light of the exceptions and
briefs and has decided to affirm the Trial Examiner's
rulings, findings, and conclusions and to adopt his
recommended Order.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations
Board adopts as its Order the recommended Order of the
Trial Examiner and hereby orders that The Brunswick
News Publishing Co., its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall take the action set forth in the Trial
Examiner's recommended Order.
TRIAL EXAMINER'S DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
WELLINGTON A. GILLIS, Trial Examiner: This case was
tried before me on November 18 and 19, 1971, at
Brunswick, Georgia, and is based upon separate charges
filed by Thomas J Barbane and Dona W. Barbarie on
August 20, 1971; upon the complaint, issued on September
30, 1971, by the General Counsel for the National Labor
Relations Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board,
against the Brunswick News Publishing Co., hereinafter
referred to as the Respondent or the Company, alleging
violations of Section 8(a)(l) and (3) and Section 2(6) and
(7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended (61
Stat. 136), and upon an answer timely filed by the
Respondent denying the commission of any unfair labor
practice.
At the hearing, the Charging Parties and the Respondent
were represented by counsel, and were afforded full
opportunity to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to
The Brunswick News Publishing Co. is a Georgia
corporation with its office and place of business located at
Brunswick, Georgia, where it is engaged in the publication
and sale of a newspaper. During the calendar year 1970,
the Respondent held a membership in, or subscribed to,
interstate news services, advertised nationally sold prod-
ucts, and realized an annual gross volume of business in
excess of $200,000. The parties admit, and I find, that the
Respondent is an employer engaged in commerce within
the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The parties admit, and I find, that the American
Newspaper Guild is a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
111. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Issues
1. Whether, on or about June 30, 1971, managing
editor Ben Payne interrogated its employees concerning
their union membership and activities in violation of
Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
2. Whether, on July 30, 1971, in discharging Dona W.
Barbarie the Respondent did so for reasons relating to
union activities in violation of Section 8(a)(3) of the Act.
3. Whether, on or about August 13, 1971, in discharg-
ing Thomas J. Barbarie, the Respondent did so for reasons
relating to his union activities in violation of Section
8(a)(3) of the Act.
B. Facts
Thomas Barbarie first went to work for the Respondent
on October 10, 1970, as a general assignment reporter,
which includes any and all news in the Brunswick, Glynn
County Costal Area. During his ensuing employment as
such, like other reporters, from time to time he was
assigned in addition various "beats," areas of responsibility
for making specific checks, including the police beat, the
city hall beat, the county courthouse, and the county
commission.
Within a few weeks after commencing his employment,
during a conversation with Benjamin Payne, managing
editor, who had hired him, Barbarie mentioned the fact
that earlier with another newspaper he had been a member
198 NLRB No. 142
944 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the American Newspaper Guild. Payne, according to
Barbarie, made the retort that, "well, thank goodness we
don't have that here." 1
Barbarie first took an overt step looking into the
possibility of unionizing the Respondent's editorial depart-
ment employees,2 when, on or about March 20, 1971,3 he
wrote a letter to the American Newspaper Guild. After an
exchange of correspondence, Barbarie was notified on
May 28, that, because of the small size of the Brunswick
News, the Guild was not in a position to assist in
organizing the staff of the News.
Barbarie subsequently contacted Owens Amos locally,
who was associated with the Chemical Workers Union,
and who suggested that he talk with a Brunswick lawyer.
This Barbarie did, and was counseled against forming an
independent union, as it would have been too weak.
In June, Barbarie got in touch with Robert Owens,
former president of the Communication Workers of
America local and a county commissioner in Brunswick.
Owens, whom Barbarie saw quite regularly at the court-
house, advised Barbarie to speak with Charles Leath,
current president of the Communications Workers, which
he did telephonically around the middle of June. Barbarie
first met Leath in person, however, in July. Around the last
week in July, early one morning before working hours,
Leath gave Barbarie a supply of showing of interest cards
for those employees interested in joining the Union.
Barbarie commenced soliciting employee signatures by
making telephone calls at night, and passing out cards
away from the plant after working hours. Barbane was
successful in getting "several" of the cards signed. While
none of this activity occurred on the Respondent's
premises and although Barbarie "was quite careful not to
initiate discussion," he did discuss the Union with
employees on occasion while at the plant.
1. Discharge of Dona Barbarie
Some time in January, when employee Ralph Heath left
the Respondent's employ, the position of Wire Editor
became open, and remained open until the following May,
with the functions of the wire editor rotating from day to
day among the staff in the newsroom. The primary
function of a wire editor is to take the news off the AP wire
as it comes in, decide which should be used, collating it
with the tapes used with the linotype machines, to waste
headlines for the stories, and to lay out pages for the
composing room to follow, referred to in the trade as
"dummying up the page." Along about the first part of
May, Tom Barbarie approached Howard Leavy, III, the
associate editor, about giving his wife, Dona, a try at the
job. Leavy suggested to Barbarie that she come in for a day
and see what the job involved, and that if she were willing
to give it a try it would be all right with him.
On Friday, May 7, Dona Barbarie came in, observed the
operation, and decided to try it. The following Monday,
May 10, she was hired by Leavy and commenced her
duties as wire editor. That afternoon, Ben Payne, who had
not known of the hiring of Dona Barbarie , and, upon
learning of it, had registered certain objections with Leavy,
discussed the matter with Tom Barbane and Leavy in the
latter's office. Despite Payne's objections to husband and
wife working together in the same office, because the
commitment had been made it was agreed that Dona
would be tried as wire editor on a trial basis to see if she
could do the job. When Tom Barbarie raised the problem
of Dona's not having a driver's license4 and the fact that
her workday would be 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., and his, at the
regular 8:30 to 5 p.m. hours, it was agreed, at Barbarie's
suggestion, that he would drive his wife to work mornings
and start his day early, writing the news he gather the day
before. At the close of the day, he would drive her home
and return to the office. As can be seen, Tom Barbarie was
the spokesman for his wife on her employment, Dona not
taking any part in the agreement.
Dona Barbarie worked the wire editor's job until her July
30 termination. Admittedly, Dona, although a college
graduate, had had no prior experience in this work, and it
appears that she had difficulty performing the job. Thus,
former linotype operator, Tom Watson, who at the time of
the hearing had voluntarily quit his 8-year employ with the
Respondent, testified that, in putting her work into type
down in the composing room, he found errors, consisting
of copy not matching tape, and vice versa, requiring
correction, and that this occurred between 50 and 65
percent of the time, with no noticeable improvement
during her employment. Make-up man, 10-year employee
Luther Porter, whose responsibility consisted of putting the
type in the pages, testified that, at the direction of Payne or
Leavy, Dona's front page layout work had to be redone
"most of the time." Robert Long, a Ludlow operator whose
function it was to set headlines, testified that he could
recall but I day during Dona's employment that he did not
have to reset some of the work coming down from her.
Quite often this was found to be necessary because the
headline did not correspond with the story.5
During her trial period with the Company, Dona
Barbarie received a lot of assistance from her husband who
knew the job well, so much so that Barbane was
admonished by Payne to not do her work for her. She also
received considerable direction on the job by both Payne
and Leavy. At least part of her trouble, the mechanical
aspect of thejob, it would appear, may be attributed to her
defective eyesight, which was caused by a hereditary
disease not correctable by lenses. In a reading test from the
witness stand it was obvious that Dona Barbarie had
considerable trouble reading material only 9 or 10 inches
away.
Finally, on July 30, Payne talked with Dona Barbarie in
the wire room, telling her that he was sorry but that they
Although Payne did not recall having said this, "certainly not at the
time of Mr. Barbane's employment," Payne was, at least, made aware of
Barbane's former association with a union
2 Other departments are, and have been for some time, covered by union
contracts with the International Typographical Union and the Printers and
Pressmen 's Union
3 Unless otherwise noted, all dates hereinafter set forth refer to the year
1971
+ Dona Barbarie had extremely poor eyesight, a fact hereinafter
discussed
5 Testimony elicited from James Rogers, a proofreader. placed on the
witness stand by counsel for the Respondent, is totally discredited and, in
no way, relied upon in this proceeding
THE BRUNSWICK NEWS PUBLISHING CO.
were going to have to let her go, citing as a reason the fact
that she did not have a "news sense." Dona asked Payne if
he thought that she could ever develop one, to which he
replied in the affirmative but stating that it would take 5 or
6 years. In reply to her further question as to whether she
had been doing the mechanical end of the job, according to
Dona, Payne said that she had. Her termmnation slip stated
that she was discharged for incompetence. Dona Barbaric
has not since been replaced, with the Respondent appar-
ently having gone back to the system of rotating among the
newsroom staff the wire editor functions.
Concerning the Respondent's decision to terminate
Dona Barbaric, Payne testified that, in his judgment, she
did not have a sense of news values, specifically a sense of
the relative importance of various news items, particularly
for use on the front page of a small town, Georgia,
newspaper. Payne testified that, in addition, Dona had
difficulty in writing a headline which would give the gist of
the story, that would reflect exactly what was in the news
item, and that, notwithstanding his efforts and those of
Leavy's to train Dona as to what was wanted on the front
page in the way of a large number of short stories each day,
she would not send down to the composing room one-
column headlines necessary for the short stones to
complete the make-up. Because of this, Payne and Leavy
repeatedly had to remake the page, rewriting headlines and
occasionally actually changing the story sent down because
it did not belong on the front page of the newspaper.
While my appraisal of Dona Barbaric was that of a very
fine person and an honest witness, the record reveals that
she was employed on a trial basis and that after 12 weeks
she just was not able to perform satisfactorily. Under the
above circumstances, coupled with the fact that she
engaged in no overt union activity at any time,6 I must find
that the Counsel for the General Counsel has not carried
his burden of proving by a preponderance of the credible
evidence that Dona Barbane's discharge on July 30 was for
discriminatory reasons.
2. Discharge of Thomas Barbaric
Thomas Barbaric continued in the Respondent's employ
until August 13, at which time he was told by Payne in
Leavy's office with the latter present that the quantity of
his work had been deteriorating, that he had not been
producing enough, and that, although an unpleasant thing,
the Company was going to have to let him go. Payne said
that they would give him 2 weeks' severance pay. Barbaric,
with little to say, left.
The record discloses, and it is acknowledged by all, that
at no time right up to his discharge did the Respondent
have any quarrel with the quality of Barbarie's work. In
fact, on at least two occasions, in January and April, he
received praise from the Associate Editor Leavy for his
editorial work on Senator Russell and Viet Nam, and,
sometime in March, was told by Leavy that, in 30 years
with the paper, he had never been as impressed with
anybody as he had with Barbaric.
It is also acknowledged by all that, at least until early
6 Dona Barbarie testified that she supported her husband's efforts to
unionize the employees, which I take to mean that she sympathized with
them, for she very frankly testified that she at no time initiated a union
945
May, the Respondent was completely satisfied also with
the quantity of work put out by Barbaric. Thus, the
Respondent's sole basis for terminating Barbaric is
premised upon the assertion that, commencing around
May 10, when his wife was hired, until his discharge on
August 13, the quantity of his work fell way off, and that,
in assisting Dona in the office when he should have been
on assignment covering the town, in the words of
Respondent's counsel, he "practically deserted his outside
reporting and the number of stories fell off."
There is no question but that Barbane spent time
attempting to help his wife break into the wire editor's
position, but whether during this period his work product
fell way off is another matter. Payne testified that around
this time, simultaneous with the closing of superior court,
Barbaric "seemed to be slacking off" on the amount of
material he had been producing, that on many occasions
he got stories that Barbaric "possibly should have gotten,"
and that other reporters covered some of the things
Barbaric "probably should have gotten." While Payne's
testimony stands unrefuted that over a period of time on
three specific instances Barbaric failed to get a story, the
remainder of the evidence relating to Barbaric's asserted
drop in production fails, I find, to sustain Respondent's
position in this regard.
Thus, during Barbaric's employment with the Company,
on a daily average, he wrote one fairly good-sized article,
and rewrote a couple of press releases or other smaller
news items that did not require "leg work." This, according
to Barbaric's unrefuted testimony, constituted his pro-
duction norm from the time of his initial employment and
is the only evidence of the quantity of Barbaric's work
before early May.
The Respondent, in an attempt to substantiate its
position as to Barbaric's diminished production, compiled
from its office files a chronological list based upon the
recollection and knowledge of Payne, of all the stones that
Barbaric had written during the period from May 6 to
August 13, excluding small items that merely required
editing and headings. When cross-examined with respect to
this list, which made reference to 55 articles, Payne either
admitted that Barbaric had written additional articles or
would not deny that he could have written certain specific
additional articles that were not included on this list. On
rebuttal, Barbaric identified an additional 25 major articles
which he testified he had written during this period. On
surrebuttal, with time to check these over, Payne conceded
that Barbaric had written at least four of them, and that he
could not say who wrote the others, that Barbaric was one
of three reporters who could have been the author.
Accordingly, Barbaric's credited testimony as to the 25
stories stands unrefuted, the record evidence thus crediting
him with some 80 major articles during this period, which,
excluding Sundays, contained approximately 85 days.
Apart from the adverse impact of the bare statistics on
the Respondent's defense, the fact that at the hearing it
became evident that Payne did not know for certain what
Barbaric had written and what he had not written during
conversation with anyone and only once, while riding home with another
employee. Judy Gillis, did she ever try to convince another to favor the
Union
946 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
this period, and, accordingly, could not have been aware of
it at the time that he made the determination to discharge,
militates against a finding of cause . In addition to the fact
that the Respondent 's sole defense in this matter lacks
substance, the record reveals that at no time pnor to the
August 13 discharge did Barbarie receive any word critical
of his production or indication that it was anything less
than satisfactory. Contrary to the Respondent's position
concerning the decision to terminate, these facts certainly
do not support the assertion that, immediately prior to the
discharge, Barbane had deserted his outside reporting.
That the Respondent, and in particular, Ben Payne, had
at some point in June and July become aware of the fact
that Barbane had been overtly interested in bringing in a
union is apparent . Thus, Donald Gottschalk, employed by
the Glynn County Council in human relations, irritated by
the News' attack on a Crispus project? on which he was
working, called Ben Payne at his home on Saturday
evening , June 19 , to inquire into the matter . Gottschalk
asked Payne who, on the paper, was responsible for the
witchhunt that was going on. Payne told him that he had
authorized the article and that Barbane was the reporter
assigned to the matter. At this point, Gottschalk, who had
been a good friend of Barbarie in the past, asked Payne to
have it stopped, and then, because he "wanted to get back
at Tom ..." volunteered the fact that Barbarie was
attempting to unionize the Brunswick News. He added that
Barbarie's wife and employee Judy Gillis were also
involved.8 Payne suggested that Gottschalk come down to
the office on Monday morning if he had anything further
to say, with which suggestion Gottschalk did not conform.
Payne also volunteered the fact that around July 16, he
had a telephone call from a Reverend E. C. Tillman,
human relations director for the Coastal Area Planning
and Development Commission, concerning the Crispus
project, during which, he, too, apprised Payne of Barbarie's
attempt to unionize the Brunswick News.
It would also appear that Payne was interested in the
extent of union activity among his editorial employees, for,
at some point around the end of June, according to
William Poole, sports editor for the News, Payne asked
him if anyone had approached him about joining the
Guild. Poole, who, in fact, had been asked briefly by
Barbarie a couple of weeks earlier if he had been interested
in joining the Union, told Payne that no one had really sat
down and talked to him at length about it. Payne, in
leaving, said that that was all he wanted to know, that it
was probably just a rumor. Payne's version of the incident
varies slightly from that given by Poole, in that the
question to Poole was whether he had heard anything of a
union being organized in the editorial department, and
Payne's answer, to the effect that he had heard nothing
other than a few times when it was mentioned to him in the
composing room by the printers who told him they should
form a union upstairs. I find the former to have been the
case and also find, under all the circumstances herein, that
it constitutes unlawful interrogation, and, as such, restraint
and coercion within the proscription of Section 8(a)(1) of
the Act.
On the record as a whole , I am of the opinion, and so
find , that, in discharging Thomas Barbarie on August 13,
1971, the Respondent did so for discriminatory reasons in
violation of Section 8(a)(3) of the Act.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon
the entire record in this case , I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Brunswick News Publishing Co., is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the Act.
2. American Newspaper Guild is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
3. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of
employment of Thomas J. Barbarie, thereby discouraging
membership in and activity on behalf of a labor union, 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.
4. By interfering with , restraining , and coercing its
employees in the exercise of the 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.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the
Act.
6. Other than as found , the Respondent has committed
no violations of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT UPON COMMERCE OF THE UNFAIR
LABOR PRACTICES
The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III,
above, occurring in connection with the operation 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
It having been found that the Respondent has engaged in
certain unfair labor practices , it is recommended that it
cease and desist therefrom and that it take certain
affirmative action which is necessary to effectuate the
policies of the Act.
It having been found that the Respondent discrinunato-
nly discharged Thomas Barbarie on August 13, 1971,
thereby violating Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act, it is
recommended that the Respondent offer the above-named
individual immediate and full reinstatement to his former
job or, if that job no longer exists , to a substantially
equivalent position without prejudice to any rights and
privileges to which he is entitled , and make him whole for
any loss of pay he may have suffered by reason of the
discrimination against him , by making payment to him of a
sum of money equal to the amount he would have earned
College Students ' Community Program
Gottschalk admitted that since then he and Barbarie had again become
good friends
THE BRUNSWICK NEWS PUBLISHING CO.
from the earliest date of the discrimination to the date of
the offer of reinstatement, less net earnings during said
period to be computed on a quarterly basis in the manner
established by the Board in F. W. Woolworth Company, 90
NLRB 289, and shall include the payment of interest at the
rate of 6 percent to be computed in the manner set forth by
the Board in Isis Plumbing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716.
In this regard, it is further recommended that the
Respondent preserve, and upon request, make available to
the Board or its agents for examination and copying, all
payroll records and reports, timecards, and all other
records necessary to compute the amount of backpay.
Upon the foregoing findings of fact, conclusions of law,
and the entire record, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the
Act, I hereby issue the following recommended:9
ORDER
Respondent, The Brunswick News Publishing Co., its
officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Discouraging membership in or activity on behalf of
the American Newspaper Guild, or any other labor
organization, by discharging or refusing to reinstate any of
its employees, or in any like manner discriminating in
regard to the hire or tenure of employment, or any term or
condition of employment, in violation of Section 8(a)(3)
and (1) of the Act.
(b) Interrogating its employees concerning union activity
in the plant.
(c) In any manner interfering with, restraining, or
coercing its employees in the exercise of their right to self-
organization, to form, join, or assist the American
Newspaper Guild, or any other labor organization, to
bargain collectively through representatives of their own
choosing and to engage in other concerted activities for the
purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or
protection or to refrain from any and all such activities.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Offer Thomas J. Barbarie immediate and full
reinstatement to his former job or, if that job no longer
exists, to a substantially equivalent position without
prejudice to any rights and privileges to which he is
entitled, and make him whole in the manner in accordance
with the method set forth in the section entitled "The
Remedy."
(b) Notify immediately the above-named individual, if
presently serving in the Armed Forces of the United States,
of the right to full reinstatement, upon application after
discharge from the Armed Forces, in accordance with the
Selective Service Act and the Universal Military Training
and Service Act.
(c) Preserve and, upon request, make available to the
Board or its agents for examination and copying, all
payroll records, social security payment records and
reports, timecards, and all other records necessary to
compute the amount of backpay due under the terms of
this recommended Order.
(d) Post in conspicuous places at its Brunswick, Georgia,
newspaper, including all places where notices to employees
947
are customarily posted, copies of the attached notice
marked "Appendix." 10 Copies of the notice, on forms
provided by the Regional Director for Region 10, shall,
after being duly signed by the authorized representative of
the Respondent, be posted by it, as aforesaid, immediately
upon receipt thereof and maintained for at least 60
consecutive days thereafter. Reasonable steps shall be
taken by the Respondent to insure that said notices are not
altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(e) Notify the Regional Director for Region 10, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this
Decision, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply
herewith. i i
IT is ALSO ORDERED that the complaint herein be
dismissed insofar as it alleges that Dona Barbane was
unlawfully discharged or that the Respondent committed
any other violations of the Act not specifically found.
9 In the event no exceptions are filed as provided by Section 102 46 of
the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, the
findings, conclusions , and recommended Order herein shall, as provided in
Section 102 48 of the 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
iO In the event that the Board's Order is enforced by a Judgment of a
United States Court of Appeals. the words in the notice reading "Posted by
Order of the National Labor Relations Board" shall be changed to read
"Posted pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals
enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board "
ii In the event that this recommended Order is adopted by the Board
after exceptions have been filed, this provision shall be modified to read
"Notify the Regional Director for Region 10, in writing, within 20 days
from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply
herewith "
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT question our employees concerning
union activity in the plant.
WE WILL NOT in any like manner interfere with,
restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their
Section 7 rights.
WE WILL NOT discharge and refuse to reemploy, or
otherwise discriminate against employees in order to
discourage membership in or support of The American
Newspaper Guild, or any other labor organization, or
infringe in any like manner upon the rights guaranteed
in Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL offer Thomas J. Barbarie immediate and
full reinstatement to his former job or, if that job no
longer exists, to a substantially equivalent position
without prejudice to any rights and privileges to which
he is entitled, and make him whole for any loss of pay
he may have suffered by reason of our discrimination
against him.
All our employees are free to become, remain, or to
refrain from becoming or remaining, members of The
American Newspaper Guild, or any other labor organiza-
tion.
948 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
THE BRUNSWICK NEWS the Selective Service Act and the Universal Military
PUBLISHING Co. Training and Service Act.
(Employer) This is an official notice and must not be defaced by
anyone.
Dated By This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days
(Representative) (Title) from the date of posting and must not be altered, defaced,
or covered by any other material.
WE WILL notify immediately the above -named individual , Any questions concerning this notice or compliance with
if presently serving in the Armed Forces of the United its provisions may be directed to the Board's Office,
States, of the right to full reinstatement , upon application Peachtree Building , Room 701 , 730 Peachtree Street, N.E.,
after discharge from the Armed Forces , in accordance with Atlanta , Georgia 30308, Telephone 404-526-5760.