Philadelphia Stereotypers Union # 7

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 12, 1974

211 N.L.R.B. 492 (N.L.R.B. 1974)

492 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Philadelphia Stereotypers Union # 7, a/w Internation-
al Printing and Graphic Communications Union,
AFL-CIO and Southern New Jersey Newspapers,
Inc. and Camden Typographical Union Local
#132, a/w International Typographical Union,
AFL-CIO. Case 4-CD-331
June 12, 1974
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF
DISPUTE
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND JENKINS
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, follow-
ing charges filed by Southern New Jersey Newspa-
pers, Inc., hereinafter called the Employer, alleging a
violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D) by the Philadelphia
Stereotypers Union #7, a/w International Printing
and Graphic Communications Union, AFL-CIO,
hereinafter called the Stereotypers. Pursuant to
notice, a hearing was held on December 13, 1973,
and January 10, 1974, at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
before Hearing Officer Harold Bernard, Jr. The
Employer, the Stereotypers, and Camden Typo-
graphical Union Local #132, a/w International
Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, hereinafter called
the Typographers, appeared at the hearing and were
offered full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses, and to adduce evidence
bearing on the issues. Thereafter, the Employer, the
Stereotypers, and the Typographers filed briefs with
the National Labor Relations Board.
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 rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the basis of the briefs and the entire record
in this case, the Board makes the following findings:
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer is a newspaper publishing company
located in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, with gross
revenue exceeding $200,000 annually. The Employer
subscribes to interstate news services, publishes
nationally syndicated features, and advertises nation-
ally sold products. The parties stipulated, and we
find, that the Employer is engaged in a business
affecting commerce within the meaning of Section
I Unless otherwise indicated , all events occurred in 1973.
2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that it will effectuate the
policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
The parties stipulated, and we find, that the
Stereotypers and the Typographers are labor organi-
zations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
A. Background and Facts of the Dispute
The Employer is engaged in the publication of the
Camden Courier-Post, a daily newspaper, in Cherry
Hill, New Jersey. Among the unions representing
employees of the Employer are the Stereotypers,
which represents employees in the stereotype room,
and the Typographers, which represents employees
in the composing room, including photoengravers.
In early summer 1973,1 the Employer told the
Stereotypers and the Typographers that it would
soon change over to the Letterflex system of
producing printing press plates . Thereafter, in Sep-
tember, the Employer determined to assign the work
of Letterflex platemaking to employees represented
by the Typographers. By letter dated September 24,
the Stereotypers threatened the Employer with
economic sanctions if employees which it represent-
ed were not assigned the work of Letterflex plate-
making. Further discussions followed and the Em-
ployer reiterated its intention of assigning the
Letterflex platemaking to employees represented by
the Typographers. On October 10, the Stereotypers
reiterated its position stated in its September 24 letter
and on October 11 carried out the threat and struck
and picketed.
The Employer has been using two processes to
print its newspaper. News and editorial items are
marked-up in a hot-type process using linotype
machines which produce lines of type formed in
relief on hot lead slugs. This process will eventually
be phased out completely by the Employer. Adver-
tisements and stock market quotations, on the other
hand, are pasted-up in a cold-metal process using
phototypesetting and photoengraving methods to
produce an engraved zinc plate in relief form. Both
hot type and cold type are locked up in a page form
or "chase" in the composing room and sent to the
stereotype room where plates are manufactured for
direct application to the presses.
The cold-metal process is performed by employees
in the composing room, including photoengravers,
who are represented by the Typographers. The
process begins with the pasteup of a "mechanical," a
composite of photographic proofs of type and
211 NLRB No. 68
PHILADELPHIA STEREOTYPERS UNION #7 493
illustrations arranged on a white paper backing. The
production of the photographic negative begins with
a cameraman who, among other things, measures the
mechanical, mounts it on the copy board of the
camera, makes time and lens adjustments, and
selects the proper size film. The cameraman then
uses a special camera, 8 feet high with a carriage 19
feet long, to make an exposure. The exposed film is
then fed into a film processor, the Log-E machine, to
produce a developed negative. The cameraman then
examines the negative to determine whether it will
reproduce in the zinc engraving process. After this
examination the negative is opaqued; i.e., any pin
holes and shadows are painted out. In some
instances , a stripping operation (cutting apart and
pasting up the negative) is required. Thereafter, a flat
sheet of sensitized zinc is placed in a vacuum frame,
and is exposed to light through the negative. The zinc
plate is then weighed and placed in a tank of
developer for about 3 minutes after which it is
transferred to a sink where a water pressure spray is
used to wash off any loose developer. The zinc plate
is then placed on a flat surface and blown dry with
an air hose. A descumming process takes place next
followed by an acid bath in the etching machine. The
zinc plate is then scrubbed, dried, and weighed again.
Finally, the zinc plate is examined, with particular
attention to the dot structure, to determine whether
the engraved zinc plate will reproduce properly.
In the stereotype room a matrix of semiwet
cardboard is placed against the chase or relief page
form which contains the hot type and cold type.
Pressure is applied and the image is transferred from
the page form to the matrix, which is then dried in a
semicylindrical shape. Molten lead is next poured
against the matrix and when cooled the lead casting
is a stereotype plate ready for the printing operation
in the pressroom.
The Employer's new Letterflex machine is a two-
component system consisting of a tower section and
a processor section. The input in the Letterflex
process is a photographic negative. This negative is
produced in the exact manner as those prepared for
use in the production of zinc engraving plates, supra.
The completed negative is inserted into the tower
section where it is exposed by ultraviolet light to a
photosensitive polymer coated plate for a predeter-
mined amount of time. The plate is then transferred
to the processor section where it goes through an
etching cycle and is then exposed once again to
ultraviolet light to complete the chemical reaction.
After the plate is removed from the processor
section, the operator examines and evaluates the
plate under a magnifying glass to determine, among
other things, the quality of the dot structure. The
Letterflex plate is then punched, bent, and trimmed
and sent to the pressroom for direct application to
the printing press.
B. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute involves press platemaking by
the Letterflex process at the Camden Courier-Post in
Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The Employer contends that its assignment to
employees represented by the Typographers is based
on the availability of related skills, economy and
efficiency of operations, and the functional similarity
of the Letterflex process and certain photoengraving
work that employees represented by the Typogra-
phers have been performing for the Employer. The
Employer further contends that there is no area
practice, but that industry practice supports its
assignment to members of the Typographers. Finally,
the Employer contends that the job impact on
employees represented by the Stereotypers will be
offset by its policy and offer to keep and retrain these
employees for work in the Employer's composing
room.
The Typographers contends that the Employer's
assignment and preference for its members is
supported by its collective-bargaining agreement, the
skills and training of its members, and the economy
and efficiency of the Employer's operations. The
Typographers further contends that area and indus-
try practice, as well as certain related Board
decisions, support an award to employees represent-
ed by the Typographers.
The Stereotypers predicates its claim for the. work
on the traditional division of work jurisdiction at the
Employer's plant, the skills of its members, its
apprenticeship program, area and industry practice,
and the job impact on its members.
D. Applicability of the Statute
The charge herein alleges a violation of Section
8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. The record shows, and the
Stereotypers concedes, that in a letter dated Septem-
ber 24, 1973, it threatened the Employer with
economic sanctions if it were not given jurisdiction
over the work here in dispute. There is also evidence
that on October 11, 1973, after the Employer had
reiterated its intention of assigning the disputed work
to employees represented by the Typographers on
October 10, 1973, the Stereotypers carried out the
threat and struck and picketed. The Stereotypers
contends that the instant dispute involves a repre-
sentation problem and that they were protesting bad-
faith bargaining by the Employer. We note, however,
494 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that this contention by the Stereotypers is in direct
conflict with the testimony of the Employer' s general
manager , Gary Snyder, that the Stereotypers presi-
dent, Thomas Hudson, told him that the employees
represented by the Stereotypers would return to work
if the Employer would agree to file a 10(k) charge
with the Board. Snyder gave Hudson a letter to this
effect and the stereotypers returned to work that
same day. On the basis of the entire record, we
conclude that there is reasonable cause to believe
that a violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D) has occurred
and that the dispute is properly before the Board for
determination under Section 10(k) of the Act.2
E. Merits of the Dispute
As the Board stated in J. A. Jones Construction
Company,3 we shall determine the appropriate
assignment of disputed work in each case presented
for resolution under Section 10(k) of the Act only
after taking into account and balancing all relevant
factors.
We set forth below those factors which we find
relevant in determining the dispute herein.
1. Collective-bargaining agreements
The Employer's collective-bargaining agreements
with the Typographers and the Stereotypers had
expired at the time of the hearing herein. Neither of
the most recent collective-bargaining agreements
between the respective parties made specific refer-
ence to the type of work in dispute in this
proceeding. Accordingly, we conclude that this
factor does not favor the assignment of the work in
dispute to either Union.
2. The Employer's assignment , preference,
and efficiency of operations
The input to the Letterflex system is a photograph-
ic negative which, whatever the assignment of the
disputed work, will be produced by employees in the
Employer's composing room who are represented by
the Typographers. The judging of the quality of the
negative is a critical step in the production process,
affecting the ultimate quality of the Letterflex plate,
and will often necessitate consultation between the
employees who produce the negative and the
employees who operate the Letterflex machine. It is
apparent that the integration of these two processes
will contribute to the efficiency of the Employer's
operations.
Under the Employer's existing assignment, the
composing room employees who are performing
Letterflex work are also available to perform other
assignments in the composing room. On the other
hand, it would appear that the Employer would lose
this flexibility if the disputed work were assigned to
the employees in the stereotype room in view of the
fact that the introduction of the Letterflex process
will substantially, if not totally, eliminate the existing
work performed by employees in the stereotype
room.
Accordingly, inasmuch as the assignment of the
Letterflex work to the composing room employees,
who are represented by the Typographers, contrib-
utes to the effective utilization of those employees
and the efficient operation of the Employer's
business , we find that this factor favors an assign-
ment to the Typographers.
3. Employer, area, and industry practice
The Employer, the Typographers, and the Stereo-
typers each introduced evidence to support its
respective contentions relative to the assignment of
Letterflex and direct printing work by the Gannett
newspapers,4 as well as area and industry practice.
We find, however, that the evidence introduced by
the parties does not establish any clear and consist-
ent practice which would assist us in making our
determination. Accordingly, we find that this factor
does not support either Union.
4. Skill
In comparing the specific skills required of a
Letterflex operator with those skills currently utilized
by the Employer's employees in its composing room
and stereotype room, it appears that the skills
possessed by employees working in the composing
room are more closely related to the Letterflex
process. In particular, employees in the composing
room who are skilled at evaluating a negative and
inspecting the dot structure of an etched plate
possess skills required in the Letterflex process.
Furthermore, a representative of the company that
manufactured the Letterflex equipment involved
here testified that it is easier to train persons to
operate the Letterflex equipment who have had prior
experience in the production of negatives. There is
no evidence that employees in the Employer's
stereotype room utilize skills related to the operation
of a camera or the evaluation of negatives.
Accordingly, we find that the skills possessed by
employees employed in the Employer's composing
room, who are represented by the Typographers,
2 The parties stipulated, and we find, that there is no agreed-upon A . Jones Construction Company), 135 NLRB 1402.
method for resolving the dispute which is binding on all the parties . 4 The Employer is part of the Gannett newspaper chain.
3 International Association of Machinists , Lodge No 1743, AFL-CIO (J.
PHILADELPHIA STEREOTYPERS UNION #7 495
favor an assignment of the disputed work to such
employees.
present determination is limited to the particular
controversy which gave rise to this proceeding.
5. Job impact
The record shows that the introduction of the
Letterflex process will eventually eliminate the
manufacture of stereotype press plates by the eight
employees in the stereotype room who are represent-
ed by the Stereotypers. Several employees in the
composing room have had their job assignments
changed as a result of the assignment of the
Letterflex work to the composing room. No new
employees have been hired to perform the Letterflex
work . The Employer claims that an assignment of the
disputed work to employees represented by the
Stereotypers and the reduction of work caused by the
automation of the photoengraving process would
require under-utilized manpower in the composing
room which it could not employ elsewhere in its
business . On the other hand, the Employer has
committed itself to offer the eight employees repre-
sented by the Stereotypers other employment in the
composing room in order to avoid actual loss of work
for any employee.
Inasmuch as there will be no job loss to the current
employees no matter to whom the assignment is
made , we find that this consideration is not determi-
native.
Conclusion
Having considered all the pertinent factors herein,
we conclude that employees represented by the
Typographers are entitled to perform the work in
dispute . In making this determination, we are
assigning the disputed work to the employees of the
Southern New Jersey Newspapers , Inc., who are
represented by Camden Typographical Union
#132, a/w International Typographical Union,
AFL-CIO, but not to the Union or its members. Our
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended , and upon the basis of the
foregoing findings and the entire record in this
proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board
hereby makes the following Determination of Dis-
pute:
1. Employees of the Southern New Jersey News-
papers, Inc., who currently are represented by
Camden Typographical Union #132, a/w Interna-
tional Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, are entitled
to perform the work of press platemaking by the
Letterflex process at the Camden Courier-Post in
Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
2. The Philadelphia Stereotypers Union # 7, a/w
International Printing and Graphic Communications
Union, AFL-CIO, is not entitled by means pro-
scribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act to force or
require the Southern New Jersey Newspapers, Inc.,
to assign the above-described Letterflex work to its
members or employees whom it represents.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute , the Philadelphia
Stereotypers Union #7, a/w International Printing
and Graphic Communications Union, AFL-CIO,
shall notify the Regional Director for Region 4, in
writing, whether or not it will refrain from forcing or
requiring the Employer, by means proscribed by
Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, to assign the work in
dispute to stereotypers represented by the Philadel-
phia Stereotypers Union #7 , a/w International
Printing and Graphic Communications Union,
AFL-CIO, rather than to employees represented by
Camden Typographical Union #132, a/w Interna-
tional Typographical Union, AFL-CIO.