The Peoria Journal Star, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 20, 1957

117 N.L.R.B. 708 (N.L.R.B. 1957)

708 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Peoria Journal Star, Inc. and American Newspaper Guild,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 13-RC-5172 and 13-RC-5173.
March 20,1957
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Joseph Cohen, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-
member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Murdock and Bean].
Upon the entire record in these cases, 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. Questions affecting commerce exist 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. The Employer is engaged at its Peoria, Illinois, plant in the print-
ing, publication, sale, and distribution of a morning and evening paper
known as the Peoria Journal Star. Its nonmechanical operations are
divided into the news-editorial, circulation, advertising, audit and
credit, and building service departments. The Petitioner seeks either
a combined unit or separate units of employees in the news-editorial
and circulation departments. The Employer contends that the units
requested are inappropriate on either a combined or separate basis,
and that the only appropriate unit would be one embracing all pres-
ently unrepresented nonmechanical employees in these five depart-
ments. There is no history of collective bargaining except with
respect to certain employees of the mechanical and circulation depart-
ments, not involved herein, who are represented by various craft
unions. For the reasons set forth in the Salt Lake Tribune case,' we
find that the combined unit, which consists of departments that do not
do similar or coordinated work, and which does not include all the Em-
1 The Salt Lake Tribune Publishing Company, 92 NLRB 1411, at 1412-1413 . In that
case, the Board noted that a multidepartment unit comprising all nonmechanical depart-
ments was characterized as the optimum appropriate unit in the newspaper industry.
It is clear, however, from the context of that case and the cases cited therein that the
Board was there merely pointing out that a multidepartment unit of that type was
considered to be the most desirable unit in the industry , but was not holding that such
a unit was the only appropriate unit in every case. Rather , the appropriateness of a
unit in a particular case turns not upon the ultimate desirability of the overall unit, but
upon the facts of that case , including the bargaining history, the Employer 's organiza-
tional structure , and the willingness of the labor organizations involved to represent the
overall unit, a factor which may be considered although it cannot be controlling.
117 NLRB No. 104.
THE PEORIA JOURNAL STAR, INC. 709
ployer's unrepresented nonmechanical employees, is inappropriate.
Separate departmental units are, however, appropriate.'
With respect to the composition of the news-editorial department
unit, the parties disagree only as to the supervisory status of 12 indi-
viduals, all of whom the Petitioner would include and the Employer
would exclude.3 The Employer contends that each of these individuals
possesses authority to recommend actions affecting the status and pay
of employees, and that some of them possess authority to take such
actions as adjusting grievances, granting time off, scheduling work
hours and vacations, and reprimanding employees. There is no evi-
dence, however, that any such recommendations would carry effective
weight, or that any of these individuals were informed that they pos-
sessed authority to make effective recommendations or to take any of
the enumerated actions; moreover, the individuals involved who testi-
fied denied that they possessed any such authority, and such authority
as they have exercised related to routine matters and apparently did
not involve the use of independent judgment. Under these circum-
stances , we find that none of these individuals possesses any of these
indicia of supervisory authority.
The day news editor (Hallstein), day telegraph editor (McLendon),
night news editor (Beers), and night telegraph editor (Johnson), sit
at a "J shaped" desk with a group of four copyreaders during their
respective shifts. The news editor sits in a central position with his
back to the city editor ; ' copyreaders sit around the rim of the desk.
The news editor receives local copy from the city editor and either
handles it himself or assigns it to a copyreader. The copyreader reads
the copy, checks it for correctness, rewrites some if necessary, writes
column heads and headlines, and gives it back to the news editor. The
news editor then checks the copyreader's work and, if satisfactory,
either "dummies it in" to those portions of the dummy sheets which
have not been filled with advertisements or delegates the dummying
job to a copyreader. The telegraph editor sits at the same desk as the
news editor, with his back to the telegraph equipment. He takes the
2Id , at 1413-1414. As the Employer's operations are organized into separate distinct
departments which appear to conform to the pattern generally found in the newspaper
industry , we find no merit in its contention that such units are rendered inappropriate
because of functional integration and centralized control ; because of interchangeability
among employees ; or because all employees receive the same benefits and have similar
conditions of employment . Nor, in view of the nature of the Employer 's organizational
structure , do we find merit in its contention that our finding as to the appropriateness
of such units is based upon the extent to which its employees have been organized.
Contrary to its further contentions , in a case such as this, which involves neither crafts-
men nor severance from an existing unit, the requirements of American Potash & Chemical
Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418, are not controlling.
8 The record does not support the Employer 's further contention that the news and
telegraph editors and the assistant sports editor are managerial employees.
* The 2 city editors , as well as 2 managing editors, the executive editor, the day sports
editor , the editor of the editorial page, and the head librarian in this department are
admitted supervisors.
710 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
national and international news -copy from the wire machines and
handles it in a manner similar to that followed by the news editor with
respect to local copy. If the managing editor or the city editor desires
a local story or picture on the front page, it is processed by the tele-
graph editor in the same manner as wire copy.
Although the Employer contends that the news and telegraph
editors are supervisors because they responsibly direct the work of, and
assign work to,'the copyreaders, such direction, including the assign-
ment of copy; appears from the record to be routine. Moreover, when
the news and telegraph editors are on duty, the city editor and the
managing editor are also on duty; consequently, a finding that the
disputed employees are supervisors would leave a ratio of 4 super-
visors at the desk for the 4 employees involved. Under these circum-
stances, we find that news editors and telegraph editors are not super-
visors within the meaning of the Act, and we shall, therefore; include
them in the unit.' -
Conver, the assistant sports editor, works on the night shift, under
the supervision of the managing editor. He writes a column 5 days
a week, coordinates the night coverage of 5 reporters for sporting
events, does rewrite work, and covers Three I League baseball and
college baseball and football: The record shows that the assignment
of reporters to specific events is generally apportioned by mutual con-
sent, and that Conver's primary duty is to check the quality of the
work of the reporters - and to require that unsatisfactory copy be
rewritten. Such authority is clearly routine. We find, therefore,
that Conver is not a supervisor within the meaning of the Act,6 and
shall include him in the unit.
The Employer contends that the day and night photo editors (New-
berg and Lawrence) have staffs of photographers under their direc-
tion to whom they make daily assignments. The record shows that
the city editors for both editions fill out assignment slips requesting
the assignment of photographers at specific times and places and give
them to the picture desk where they are written into the assignment
book by Newberg, and that Lawrence's assignment of photographers
is effectuated by simply filling in the names of the three nightside
photographers on the assignment book if they have not already been
inscribed before he arrives at work. Lawrence testified that he has
nothing to do with the quality of the pictures or the performance of
the photographers. As it is clear that the direction and assignment
of the photographers by Newberg and Lawrence is of a routine nature,
we find that they are not supervisors within the meaning of the Act
and we shall, therefore, include them in the unit.
5 The Daily Press, Incorporated, 110 NLRB 573-582.
Greensboro News Company, Inc., 85 NLRB 54, 55.
THE PEORIA JOURNAL STAR, INC. 711
Like the managing editors, the editorial editor, and the head
librarian, whom the parties have agreed to exclude, Gruba, the Sunday
editor, works under,the immediate supervision of the executive- editor.
He coordinates activities in the various departments for the Sunday
edition, decides headlines and length of stories, selects wire copy to be
used, assigns copy to two other Sunday edition employees, and checks,
corrects, or rejects their work., On Saturday night, Gruba has final
authority to determine the content of the Sunday paper, including
authority to determine what stories will be printed and where they
will appear. Under all the circumstances, we find that Gruba's in-
terests by reason of his managerial functions are different from the
interests of the other employees in the unit; accordingly, we, shall
exclude him from the unit.
Burson, the State editor, heads and selects for publication regional
news supplied by correspondents in outlying areas and by "stringers"
who are paid space rates by the Employer.' He checks occasionally
with both correspondents and stringers to make sure that important
events are covered. As such duties are clearly routine, we find that
Burson is not a supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and shall
.include him in the unit'
The women's editor (Haskins) and the society editor (Derges)
work together for the production of the women's page which serves
both the morning and evening editions of the Journal. Derges writes
a society column and determines what social items should be covered,
while Haskins writes on women's subjects such as foods, fashions, and
social events, and determines what copy should be included in the
makeup of the women's page. There are two other employees in this
department. One of these, Robinson, formerly the society editor,
writes a personal column at home and delivers it to the Employer's
downtown office. She has no particular hours and picks up and
writes her items as she chooses. The other employee, Newberg, is an
accomplished feature writer. She "consults with Haskins and is
guided by her" but is fully capable of carrying on her work during
Haskins' absence from the office. It is apparent from the record that
Robinson works without supervision and that Newberg only consults
with, and is guided by, Haskins. Under these circumstances, we find
that Haskins and Derges are not supervisors within the meaning of
the Act and shall include them in the unit.
Ziegler, the art editor, works on the day shift under the supervision
of the managing editor. He is a working artist who spends more than
7 Burson can affect the pay of stringers by rejecting their work and thus reducing the
amount they receive according to their space rate. The parties, however, agree and we
find, that the Employer has no control over these free -lance reporters or "stringers" and
that they are not employees of the Employer within the meaning of the Act. Cf. The
Register and Tribune Company, 73 NLRB 728, 731.
8 Greensboro News Company, Inc., supra.
712 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
one-half of his time performing artwork. He also makes routine
assignments of work to two other artists who do the usual newspaper
artwork such as photo retouching, drawing, lettering, and maps. Al-
though the record shows that Ziegler was instrumental in arranging
for one of the artists to work at night while completing her educa-
tion, this alone is clearly insufficient ground to support a finding that
Ziegler is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. We shall, there-
fore, include him in the unit.
The parties generally agree as to the composition of the circulation
department unit,s but disagree with respect to the employee status of
honor box attendants in the circulation department whom the Peti-
tioner would include as employees and the Employer would exclude as
independent contractors. The Petitioner also indicated its willing-
ness to represent clerical employees in the circulation department
either in a unit with other circulation employees or separately.
The 2 honor box attendants spend about 2 hours daily 5 days a week
distributing to honor boxes newspapers which they purchase at whole-
sale prices and collecting receipts and unsold copies. They have a
verbal agreement with the Employer for servicing the boxes and re-
ceive $2 or $3 per day for the use of their automobiles. They are not
carried on the Employer's payroll, and no deductions are made from
their expense allowance for withholding, social-security, or workmen's
compensation taxes. As it appears that the honor box attendants de-
pend for their income not upon wages, but upon the profit represented
by the difference between what they pay for their papers at whole-
sale and the retail price they receive from their sale, we find that they
are independent contractors and shall exclude them from the unit.'°
The Petitioner has indicated its willingness to represent the clerical
employees in the circulation department either in the unit with out-
side circulation employees or in a separate unit. These employees
perform the usual clerical and bookkeeping duties in connection with
the circulation department, but a portion of their time is spent per-
forming work in other departments. In all its presently unrepresented
departments, the Employer employs approximately 30 office employees
who have the same wages, hours, and working conditions. There is
also some interchange of clerical employees between the departments.
Under these circumstances, we find that the interests of clerical em-
ployees in the circulation department lie with those of other clericals,
rather than with those of the outside delivery employees who com-
prise the agreed inclusions in this unit. Accordingly, we shall exclude
9 The parties agree to exclude all employees in this department who are presently
represented by other labor organizations.
10 The Dispatch Printing Company, Incorporated , 93 NLRB 1282 , 1285, and cases cited
therein.
PHARMACY PAPER BOX CO . 713
the clerical employees from the circulation department unit." As
the Petitioner seeks only a unit of circulation department clericals,
and does not have a sufficient showing of interest to support an elec-
tion in a unit embracing all clerical employees, we will not direct an
election among any of the clerical employees.
We find that the following employees of the Employer constitute
units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining :
1. All employees of the news-editorial department, including the
day and night news editors, the day and night telegraph editors, the
assistant sports editor, the day and night picture editors, the State
editor, the women's editor, the society editor, and the art editor, but
excluding the Sunday editor, the managing editor, the executive edi-
tor, city editors, the day sports editor, the editor of the editorial pages,
the head librarian, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act.
2. All employees of the circulation department, excluding office
clerical employees, employees presently represented by other labor
organizations, honor box attendants, the circulation manager, the as-
sistant circulation manager, and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
"The Dispatch Printing Company, Incorporated , supra; cf. The Chicago Daily News,
Inc., 98 NLRB 1235.
Samuel Karasik, Nathan Karasik, Philip Karasik, Harry A.
Karasik , and Simon Karasik , d/b/a Pharmacy Paper Box Co.,
a Partnership and United Packinghouse Workers of America,
AFL-CIO.' Case No. 13-CA-2085. March 21, 1957
DECISION AND ORDER
On July 24, 1956, Trial Examiner Thomas S. Wilson issued his
Intermediate Report in this proceeding, finding that the Respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices
and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report
attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent Company filed excep-
tions and brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers in
connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Murdock,
Rodgers, and Bean].
1 The AFL and CIO having merged, we amend the identification of the Union's affiliation.
117 NLRB No. 110.