Newspaper and Mail Deliverers of N.Y.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 19, 1972

199 N.L.R.B. 869 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

NEWSPAPER AND MAIL DELIVERERS OF N.Y.
Newspaper and Mail Deliverers ' Union of New York
and Vicinity and New York News, Inc. and New
York Mailers Union No. 6, International Typograph-
ical Union, AFL-CIO
New York Mailers Union No. 6, International Typo-
graphical Union, AFL-CIO and New York News,
Inc. and Newspaper and Mail Deliverers' Union of
New York and Vicinity. Cases 29-CD-126 and 29-
CD-127
October 19, 1972
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF
DISPUTE AND ORDER QUASHING NOTICE
OF HEARING IN PART
BY MEMBERS JENKINS, KENNEDY, AND PENELLO
This is a consolidated proceeding under Section
10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, following the filing of charges by New York
News, Inc., herein called the Company. The charge
against Newspaper and Mail Deliverers' Union of
New York and Vicinity, herein called Deliverers, al-
leges that Deliverers violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the
Act by engaging in certain proscribed activity with an
object of forcing or requiring the Company to assign
certain work to employees represented by Deliverers
rather than to employees represented by New York
Mailers Union No. 6, International Typographical
Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Mailers. The charge
against Mailers involves the same work dispute and
alleges that Mailers engaged in like illegal conduct for
the purpose of forcing the Company to assign the
work to members of Mailers instead of to members of
Deliverers.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held before
Hearing Officer Joan Zweifel at Brooklyn, N.Y., on
June 21, and July 7, 1972.' All parties appeared at the
hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to adduce evidence bearing on the issues. None of the
parties filed briefs.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds they are free
from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following findings:
' Except as noted , all dates are 1972.
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
869
The parties stipulated that the Company pub-
lishes a daily and Sunday newspaper in New York
City; its annual gross revenue from its publishing op-
erations exceeds $200,000; it holds membership in
and subscribes to various interstate news services, in-
cluding, inter alia, Associated Press; and it publishes
various syndicated features and advertises various na-
tionally sold products. Accordingly, we find that the
Company is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act and that it will effectuate the purposes of
the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
II THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that Deliver-
ers and Mailers are labor organizations within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III THE DISPUTE
A. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute consists of the handling of
mail bundles after they have left the wiretie machines,
which includes the work of pushing tables filled with
mail bundles; removing such bundles from the tables
and stacking them on wooden skids, also known as
dumping; and removing wrappers from mail bundles
during retie on the floor.
B. Background and Facts of the Dispute
The Company's Brooklyn , New York, plant
mailroom is the locale of the dispute , which involves
certain work on the "mail" or "east route" bundles of
newspaper . After the newspapers have gone through
the printing process , they are moved from the press-
room to stackers along conveyors to wire-tying ma-
chines which are at the end of conveyors. At the
wire-tying machine , an employee , represented by
Mailers , takes a wrapper , puts it on top of the bundle,
and presses the pedal which wireties the bundles. As
the tied bundles come out of the machine , two other
employees , represented by Mailers , pick up the bun-
dles and place 21 of them on a table with wheels.
When the table is full , the mailers push it far enough
away from the wire-tying machine to make room for
another table . Employees , represented by Deliverers,
then take the table loaded with bundles , and push it
toward and onto the platform for loading into trucks.
The deliverers thereafter bring the empty table to the
vicinity of the wire machine in the mail room. In
certain circumstances , the deliverers do not take the
mail bundles directly to the loading platform but
199 NLRB No. 141
870 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
stack them on skids , a procedure known as dumping.
When deliverers retie the bundles , they remove the
wrappers placed on them by mailers.
Deliverers in the mailroom also operate the wire-
tie machine for all "local" or "direct delivery" papers,
load the tied bundles on tables , push the load to the
platform, and load it into the trucks . There is no dis-
pute as to local or direct delivery paper bundles.
On April 27, 1972, the deliverers began dumping
east route bundles in the mailroom rather than taking
them to the platform for loading . Mailers Chapel
Chairman Salzburg complained that dumping mail
bundles was mailers ' work and he threatened to shut
down the presses if deliverers continued to perform
this work ; later , he caused two presses to be shut
down for this reason . Early the next morning,
Salzburg complained about the fact that deliverers,
rather than mailers , were removing the wrappers from
bundles that were being retied by the deliverers in the
mail room.
During the early morning hours of April 30, De-
livers Assistant Chapel Chairman Goldstein com-
plained that mailers were taking tables from the
wire-tying machine to the wall at the loading platform
rather than simply rolling them away from the wire-
tying machine , and he threatened a work stoppage if
this did not cease . When it did not, he ordered deliver-
ers to stop working . After work resumed , the mailers
objected to the deliverers ' retying the mail bundles in
the mailroom and countered by ripping off the wrap-
pers before retie . Goldstein again warned of a work
stoppage if the mailers continued to push the tables,
and he caused certain presses to stop.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The Mailers contends that there is no dispute
cognizable by the Board because of previous separate
arbitration awards made under Mailers and Deliver-
ers contracts and on account of the Board's decision
in Newpaper and Mail Deliverers ' Union of New York
and Vicinity, Independent (News Syndicate Co., Inc.),
141 NLRB 578. It also relies upon the arbitration
clauses in the collective-bargaining agreements be-
tween the Company and Unions herein . Alternative-
ly, should the Board resolve the work-dispute issues
on their merits , it would have the Board award such
work to mailers who are represented by it.
The Company and Deliverers are in agreement
that no trilateral method of voluntary adjustment of
the dispute herein has been agreed upon or exists.
Both maintain that the disputed work should be as-
signed to deliverers who are represented by the Deliv-
erers.
D. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board proceeds with a determination
of dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, it must
be satisfied that there is reasonable cause to believe
that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated.
As described above , work stoppages were threat-
ened and caused by the Mailers and Delivers on the
account of the performance of disputed work by the
other' s members and for the purpose of inducing the
Company to assign the disputed work to their re-
spective members.
We find no merit in the Mailers contention that
there has been an adjustment or agreed-upon method
for the voluntary adjustment of the disputed work
under Section 10(k) of the Act. For, as was said by the
Board in News Syndicate Co., supra:" . . . the Mailers
arbitration would be binding only upon the Mailers
and the Company, and the Deliverers arbitration like-
wise would be binding only upon the Deliverers and
the Company. The voluntary adjustment must bind
both disputing Unions as well as the Employer to
come within the meaning of voluntary settlement as
set out in Section 10(k)." Moreover , the work which
was the subject of the arbitration awards , as well as
the work in dispute in the News Syndicate Co. case, is
not the same work as is in dispute herein.
On the basis of the entire record , we find there is
reasonable cause to believe that a violation of Section
8(b)(4)(D) has occurred , and that the dispute is prop-
erly before the Board for determination under Section
10(k) of the Act.
E. Merits of the Dispute
Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to
make an affirmative award of disputed work after
giving due consideration to . various factors . Certain
of the usual factors considered by the Board in these
cases, such as skills and contracts , provide little if any
basis for determining the instant dispute . For all par-
ties agree that no special skill or training is required
to perform the work in dispute , and neither Union has
a contract which provides for its performance of such
work.
In terms of economy and efficiency of opera-
tions, the Company testified that, if the work in dis-
pute of pushing tables filled with mail bundles,
dumping , and removing wrappers from mail bundles
during retying on the floor was assigned to mailers, it
would have to hire additional mailers whereas the
present complement of deliverers can perform the dis-
puted work without interruption of their present du-
ties . The Company thus favors an award of the work
to the deliverers who have been performing such work
at the Brooklyn plant . There is no other evidence of
NEWSPAPER AND MAIL DELIVERERS OF N.Y.
Company or area practice which would favor an
award to the mailers.
F. Conclusion
Upon the record as a whole , and after full con-
sideration of all the relevant factors involved , we con-
clude that the Company's employees who are
represented by Deliverers are entitled to perform the
work in dispute . Our determination to award the work
to the employees who are represented by the Deliver-
ers, but not to that Union or its members, is limited
to the particular controversy which gave rise to this
proceeding.
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, and on the basis of the
foregoing findings and the entire record in this pro-
ceeding, the National Labor Relations Board makes
the following Determination of Dispute:
1. Employees of New York News, Inc., who are
represented by Newspaper and Mail Deliverers' Un-
ion of New York and Vicinity at the Company's
871
Brooklyn, New York, plant, are entitled to perform
the work of: (1) pushing tables filled with mail bun-
dles; (2) removing mail bundles from tables and
stacking them on skids (dumping); and (3) pulling
wrappers off mail bundles during retie on the floor.
2. New York Mailers Union No. 6, International
Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, is not entitled by
means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act to
force or require New York News , Inc., to assign the
above-described work to employees represented by
Mailers Union No. 6.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute, New York Mailers
Union No. 6, International Typographical Union,
AFL-CIO, shall notify the Regional Director for Re-
gion 29 , in writing , whether or not it will refrain from
forcing or requiring New York News , Inc., to assign
the work in dispute to employees represented by it
rather than to employees represented by Newspaper
and Mail Delivers' Union of New York and Vicinity.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the notice of hearing in
this proceeding be, and it hereby is, quashed insofar
as it concerns Case 29-CD-126.
I