Royal Communicating Graphics

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 23, 1969

176 N.L.R.B. 163 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

ROYAL COMMUNICATING GRAPHICS
R.B.P., Inc ., d/b/a Royal Communicating Graphics
and Lithographers and Photoengravers
International Union, Local 17-L, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner . Case 20-RC-8320
May 23, 1969
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
BROWN AND JENKINS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before William L. McEntire,
Hearing Officer of the National Labor Relations
Board. Following the hearing and pursuant to
Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
the Regional Director for Region 20 transferred this
case to the Board for decision. Thereafter, the
Employer and the Petitioner filed briefs.
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.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They 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 and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization within
the meaning of the Act and claims to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of certain 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 in the business of
producing copies of items by a wide variety of
photographic and other processes, such as blueprint,
diazo, electrostatics, lithography, photostat, and
xerography.
The Petitioner contends that employees engaged
in the lithographic process form an identifiable and
cohesive unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining at the Employer's plant. The
Petitioner describes this unit as consisting of "at
least" eight operators and one feeder of lithographic
presses, and an offset platemaker, all of whom work
in the Offset Department on the first floor where the
presses are located; two negative assemblers, who
perform offset preparatory work in the Art and
Photographic Departments located on other floors
of the plant; and a cameraman in the Photographic
176 NLRB No. 22
163
Department. i The Petitioner further contends that a
unit comprised of these and six other employees who
do bindery work in the Offset Department would
comprise an appropriate and acceptable alternative
unit.
The Employer contends that due to the nature of
its business, wherein material is reproduced by a
wide variety of methods, there is a close integration
of its different copying processes, and the only
appropriate unit must therefore be plantwide. The
Employer urges that this is evident from a common
use of its equipment on lithographic and
nonlithographic work and from a necessary periodic
reassignment of its personnel to lithographic and
nonlithographic duties to meet a workload
constantly changing in nature and magnitude.
Accordingly, the Employer contends that any unit
smaller than a plantwide unit is not appropriate.'
The Board has often held that employees engaged
in the lithographic process ordinarily form a
cohesive unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining where the employees perform
usual lithographic duties and exercise the customary
skills utilized in a traditional lithographic production
unit.' The record shows that almost half of the
Employer's employees perform such duties and
exercise such skills. However, the Employer points
to a number of circumstances to support its
contention that only a plantwide unit (and not a
lithographic production unit) is appropriate. These
circumstances have received our careful attention,
and tend to show that a plantwide unit would also
be appropriate in this case, one of first impression in
the photocopying industry. However, the evidence
shows that the core of the lithographic operation
under consideration, the offset pressmen, work
under separate supervision at one central location in
a well defined administrative unit of the Employer,
the Offset Department. While it is true that press
operators often progress to their positions after
receiving training and supervision in the Employer's
other operations, a majority of them do not, after
attaining such status, regularly interchange to
nonlithographic operations in the plant. Finally, 13
'The parties' briefs identify these employees as Billy Andrews, Allen
Davis, Sarah Johnson , Chong Kim, Beverly Kruger , David Lindsley,
Republican Luccia, Sach Mayeda, press operators ; Richard Sherman, a
press feeder; Gilbert Lee and Suva Ma, negative assemblers ; Veronica
Sims, a platemaker , Lun Yun Ng, a cameraman . Davis spends 50 percent
of his time training as a press operator.
rrlte Employer does not concede that the Petitioner 's alternative unit
request is appropriate , since in the Employer 's view the unit would contain
only some employees engaged in the offset process, plus bindery workers
who are not so engaged . The Employer' s brief does recognize, however,
that the lithographic production employees sought by the Petitioner
regularly devote sufficient periods of their time performing offset work to
be regarded as lithographic production employees. The Employer argues
that our dismissal of a petition for a bargaining unit of messengers in a
previous case involving this same plant and Employer, R.B.P. Inc, d/b/a
Royal Blue Print Company. 166 NLRB No. 25, proves the integration of
the Employer's production processes . This argument lacks merit. We held
in that case merely that the messengers had no sufficient community of
interest separate from that of the other employees which would warrant
their establishment as a separate appropriate unit.
'Sherwin-Williams Co., 173 NLRB No. 54
164 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees (identified by the parties' briefs and
named above herein) clearly devote a predominant
amount of their time to lithographic production
work. Under all the aforementioned circumstances
we find the degree of intergration of the Employer's
operations to be not significantly greater than in
other cases where we have found a lithographic unit
to be appropriate. In view of the foregoing, we find
that all of the Employer's employees who are
engaged in the lighographic production process also
constitute an appropriate unit for collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the
Act.'
We expressly include in the unit above found
appropriate the 13 employees identified by the
parties herein as those who are predominantly
engaged in the performance of usual lithographic
duties.
A further question arises as to whether about 17
other employees in the Employer's plant, who spend
a substantial although not a predominant amount of
their time performing lithographic duties, and the
balance doing nonlithographic work, should be
included in the lithographic production unit.' In the
Berea Publishing Company case," in deciding the
eligibility of employees who perform more than one
function for the same employer, we established the
rule that we would allow such employees to vote,
even though they spend less than a majority of their
time on unit work, if they regularly perform duties
similar to those performed by unit employees for
sufficient periods of time to demonstrate that have a
substantial interest in working conditions in the unit.
It appears possible that the parties to this
proceeding may be able to agree about which of the
dual-function employees in question meet the test
'Sherwin -Williams Co ., supra. Shwnate , Incorporated , 131 NLRB 98,
99; McCall Corporation, 118 NLRB 1332, 1334.
'These employees are identified as Delia Edwards , Larry Hayes, Andrew
Perez, Mary Ramos, Dennis Roberts, Yelba Schlocker, Gene Stewart, Est
Due Acqua , Douglas Leong , Yvonne Schneberger . Lilo Bartel , Marilyn
Mimaki, Jimmy Wong , Massaru Mochida , Paul Sawyer , Betty Morgan,
and Wayne Holland
'Berea Publishing Company, 140 NLRB 516. 519
established in the Berea Publishing Company case.
We find that those employees regarding whom such
an agreement may be reached are eligible to vote in
the election we shall direct. We shall permit the
remaining dual-function employees, concerning
whose eligiblity the parties may not agree, to vote
subject to challenge.
Accordingly, we find that the following employees
constitute a unit appropriate for collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the
Act:
All employees at the Employer's San Francisco
plant engaged in lithographic production work,
including art and paste up workers, strippers
(negative assemblers), camera operators,
platemakers, pressmen operating lithographic
presses of all types (including multilith, Davidson
ATF Chief 15, ATF 25, Miller Perfecter, Webb
Offset, Rotoprint, ATF Chief 29 and ATF Chief
1420), press trainees,' and press feeders, but
excluding cutters, bindery employees, and all other
employees, professional employees, guards and
supervisors as defined in the Act, as amended.
[Direction" of Election' omitted from publication.]
'We find that Allen Davis , an employee who is learning to operate offset
presses , and who spends an estimated 50 percent of his time in such
activity , is a trainee on offset presses Accordingly , on that basis, we
include him in the lithographic process unit we have found appropriate.
'As the Petitioner 's showing of interest was in a smaller unit than is here
found appropriate , the Direction of Election is subject to an administrative
determination by the Regional Director for Region 20 that the Petitioner's
showing of interest in the unit of employees here found appropriate is
sufficient.
'In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to
be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all
parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their
addresses which may be used to communicate with them. Excelsior
Underwear Inc. 156 NLRB 1236, N. L.R.B. v. Wyman-Gordon Company,
394 U.S 759, decided April 23, 1969. Accordingly , it is hereby directed
that an election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all
the eligible voters , must be filed by the Employer with the Regional
Director for Region 20 within 7 days of the date of this Decision and
Direction of Election . The Regional Director shall make the list available
to all parties to the election. No extension of time to file this list shall be
granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances.
Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside
the election whenever proper objections are filed.