Pressmen, Union No. 23

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 20, 1973

202 N.L.R.B. 506 (N.L.R.B. 1973)

506 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Albany Printing Pressmen , Assistants and Offset
Workers Union No. 23, AFL-CIO and Boyd
Printing Company , Inc. and Albany Typographical
Union No . 4, AFL-CIO. Case 3-CD-402
March 20, 1973
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 Boyd Printing Company, Inc.,
(hereinafter Boyd), alleging that Albany Printing
Pressmen , Assistants and Offset Workers Union No.
23, AFL-CIO (hereinafter Pressmen) violated Sec-
tion 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. A duly scheduled hearing
was held before Hearing Officer Francis J. Novak,
Jr., on August 21 and 22, 1972. All parties appeared
and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to adduce
evidence bearing on the issues.' Thereafter, Boyd,
the Pressmen , and the Albany Typographical Union
No. 4, AFL-CIO (hereinafter ATU or Typogra-
phers) filed briefs.
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 reviewed the rulings made by the
Hearing Officer at the hearing and finds they are free
from prejudicial error . They are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case , including the
aforementioned briefs, the Board makes the follow-
ing findings:
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The parties stipulated, and we find, that Boyd
Printing Company, Inc., is a New York corporation
located at Albany, New York, engaged in printing as
a commercial printer. The Company, during the past
12-month period, has purchased materials from
outside the State of New York in excess of $50,000
for use at its Albany, New York, plant and has sold
final printing work valued in excess of $50,000
destined for points outside the State of New York.
The parties stipulated, and we find, that Boyd
Printing Company, Inc., is an employer engaged in
I International Typographical Union intervened at the hearing.
2 The offset printing method sought by Boyd was not intended to
eliminate all of its traditional letterpress printing , which it retained, but was
to be a supplement to or an additional method of punting
3 The Employer's assignment in dispute was as follows All work [offset
preparatory ] up to the burning of the offset plate would be accomplished by
the employees of Boyd Punting Company, Inc, who are members of
commerce within the meaning of the Act. We find it
will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert
jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that both the
Pressmen and the Typographers are labor organiza-
tions within the meaning of the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
This case involves certain offset preparatory work
described more fully below.
A. Background and Facts of the Dispute
Boyd, until approximately 1 year prior to the
dispute herein, was strictly a letterpress commercial
printer. However, because of a decreased volume of
business due to customer loss and the fact that it was
informed by its largest customer that in 5 years all of
the customer's work would have to be of the coldtype
variety (offset), Boyd started investigations in early
1971 to determine which offset method would best
suit its needs.2 After making its decision to go
partially into offset printing, Boyd purchased an
offset press, a platemaker, a camera, a film processor,
and related accessory items and laid out a floor plan
for the proposed transition.
On or about November 23, 1971, after discussions
with representatives of the Pressmen and Typogra-
phers, the Employer made a tentative assignment in
relation to its future offset printing to the typogra-
phers of all work up to the burning of the offset
plate.3 During the discussions, the Pressmen objected
to the assignment.4 The Employer gave the two
Unions 10 days in which to file alternatives to the
tentative assignment. On or about November 29,
1971, the Typographers by letter accepted the
assignment. The Pressmen failed to offer any written
alternatives. On or about December 29, 1971, the
Employer sent letters to the presidents of both
Unions setting forth the work assignment, identical
in terms to the tentative assignment, and, on or about
the same date, posted the work assignment notice in
its plant. In February 1972, the Employer received
delivery of the offset printing equipment. In April or
May 1972, the Employer started trial runs on its
offset equipment and on or about June 1, 1972, it
began full operations , assigning tasks to its employ-
Albany Typographical Union No 4, AFL-CIO
4 The Pressmen's objection is limited to only that part of the Employer's
assignment which assigned to the members of Typographers the preparatory
work encompassing the preparation of the negatives of the individual pages,
e, operation of the camera and the imposing of these negatives on the
"goldenrod" in preparation for the burning off of the plate See In 6, infra,
for a more complete description
202 NLRB No. 66
PRESSMEN , UNION NO. 23 507
ees in accordance with its previously announced
work assignment.
No pressmen lost work as a result of the Employ-
er's assignment. In fact, additional pressmen were
hired as a result of increased business. Nor did any
typographer lose work as a result of the assignment.
However, if the assignment had been made to the
pressmen, a layoff of typographers would have been
necessary while additional pressmen would have had
to have been hired.
B. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute essentially covers a technologi-
cal change in work traditionally performed by
typographers and crossing the line with work
previously performed by pressmen. As the Employer
originally operated, it was a letterpress operation. In
this operation, known as "hottype," the customer's
copy, after being marked for style and page width, is
turned over to a typographer who in turn prepares it
for the linotype operator to set the type in accord-
ance with the preface style and size as indicated.5
Upon customer approval of pageproof, a high quality
reproduction proof of each metal page is made on a
proof press by a typographer and sent to a pasteup
area where it is pasted on a carrier sheet, allowing for
proper margain and space position, and imposed in
groups in such a manner as to have proper
pagination. A photograph of the high quality proofs
is then taken by a typographer and converted into
film negatives with eight pages on each negative and
impositioned, allowing for margins and accurate
spacing at top and bottom of the page, on a carrier or
flat known as a "goldenrod."6 When this is done, the
flat or "goldenrod" is turned over to the pressmen for
platemaking.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The Employer contends that the assignment to the
employees represented by Typographers was com-
pelled by the pertinent collective-bargaining agree-
ments; that this type of work newly evolved from
work theretofore performed by employees represent-
5 The linotype machine is a mechanical device with a keyboard operated
by a typographer When he depresses the proper keys the machine forms a
line of letters or works which automatically by hot metal makes a line of
raised letters or words properly spaced on a lead base so as to make it type
high The line of type or slugs, including typographers' errors if any, are
placed on a galley or proof press, which is manually operated A galley
proof is taken to a typographer who checks with the customer's copy as to
errors or omissions If there are errors , they are corrected , if none, copies
are sent to the customer who approves them or makes additions When the
customer and the typographer are fully satisfied as to the proof copies, that
is all changes and corrections having been made , the pages in final form are
set up in a form on a large steel table (stone) and laid within what is called a
chase The chase then is turned over to the pressmen The pressmen then
take off a mat from the chase from which they cast a metal plate All of the
work described above , except the making of the mat and the casting of the
ed by the Typographers Union; that its assignment
caused no job losses to employees represented by the
Pressmen and preserved jobs for employees repre-
sented by the Typographers; that the assignment of
the disputed work to the typographers resulted in
greater efficiency, quality, and cost control; and that
the change was necessitated by its response to its
customers' demands.
The Typographers contends that its contract
clearly calls for the assignment of the work to
employees represented by it. Other factors relied
upon by the Typographers are industry practice; that
the employees represented by it exercise the same
work skills employed in the letterpress process as are
required in the offset process, up to the actual
printing; that in many cases the employees represent-
ed by it needed no retraining; that the work tasks in
connection with the offset process were substitutes
for tasks in the letterpress process; that the task in
dispute is composing room work; that it maintains a
training program for its members for the purpose of
becoming more skilled in the substitute processes;
that if the assignment were made to the pressmen,
Typographers members would suffer a layoff while
the number of pressmen would be increased; that the
composing room at the Employer's plant is an
integrated one within which typographers from
different areas therein are transferred from one work
area to another in accordance with workflow; that
the assignment to typographers is more economical
and makes for a more steady and even workflow and
permits a high degree of quality control; and that the
interpretation of the jurisdictional clauses of the
outstanding contracts between the Employer and the
two Unions at the time of the assignment gave the
right to the Employer to assign the disputed work to
the typographers.
The Pressmen contends that the work of preparing
the negatives of the individual pages, i.e., operation
of the camera and the imposing of these negatives on
the goldenrod in preparation for the burning of the
plate, is properly within its jurisdiction; that the
employees represented by it were awarded this type
of work by contractual agreement with Boyd; that its
metal plate , is performed by typographers
6 These high quality proofs are sent to the "pasteup" area where they are
pasted on a carrier with proper margin and space positions and laid out,
usually in groups of 32 so they will be in proper page sequence when they
come off the punting press After the high quality proofs are placed on
tamers , a photograph is taken by a typographer, in the instant case , of such
pages in order The 32 high quality reproduction proofs, thus photographed,
are converted to 4 film negatives with 8 pages being contained on each of
such negatives The 4 negatives are then placed on the "goldenrod" by a
typographer in such a position that the 32 pages are in proper page sequence
when they come off the folder after being printed.
The "goldenrod" is then taken to the pressmen for platemaking. All of
the above work, up to the platemaking, was performed by the Employer's
typographical employees
508 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
members possess the necessary skills to perform this
work which they do in other area printing plants;
that pressmen can do it as efficiently and economi-
cally as the typographers; and that an award of the
disputed work to the typographers will certainly
result in a reduction in the employment of pressmen
at Boyd's, as the Company will probably phase out
the inefficient costly letterpress method and become
an offset operation.
D. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board may proceed with a determina-
tion of a 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.
The facts show that the Employer assigned the
disputed work to its employees who are members
represented by the Typographers and that they desire
to continue to perform the work.
The record herein gives reasonable cause to believe
that Respondent continually protested the Employ-
er's assignment of the disputed work to the typogra-
phers from the date of the original assignment by the
Employer on December 31, 1971. On or about
March 30, 1972, the Pressmen through its president,
Charles Moore, by letter, notified Carl Johnson,
Boyd's vice president, that the Pressmen would be
forced to strike if Boyd violated the terms of their
contract and awarded the disputed work to the
typographers. Thereafter, the pressmen refused for a
time to operate the offset presses when the typogra-
phers had performed the above-described preparato-
ry work assigned to them by,the Employer.
On the basis of the above description of the
Pressmens conduct, we find reasonable cause to
believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act has been
violated and that the dispute is properly before the
Board for determination under Section 10(k) of the
Act.
E. Merits of the Dispute
As the Board stated in J. A. Jones Construction
Company,7 we shall determine the appropriate
assignment of the 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. In our judgment, the following
factors are relevant here:
1. The collective-bargaining agreements
At the time the Employer made the assignment to
the typographers, the contract between the Employer
and ATU No. 4 provided in relevant part that the
typographers shall "perform all composing work"
and that
the Employer agrees to supply journeymen and
apprentices full opportunity to become proficient
on all new equipment, machinery or processes
which are a substitute for, evolution of, or which
replaces present equipment, machinery or proc-
esses and the union agrees to supply when
possible partially trained journeymen and appren-
tices for that purpose. The Employer will give the
union sufficient advance notice of his intention to
install any new equipment machinery or processes
to enable the contracting parties to implement the
provisions of this section.
On the other hand, the contract between the
Employer and the Pressmen had expired on Septem-
ber 30, 1971, prior to the Employer's assignment. A
new contract was under negotiation but was not
consumated until May 1972, several months after the
Employer made a final assignment of the work here
in dispute.8 There is some indication that the parties
carried over the terms of the expired contract while
negotiating over the terms of a new agreement. But
this is only a supposition. The jurisdictional clause of
the expired contract provides in pertinent part that:
... the jurisdiction of the Union for work to be
performed shall set forth in language different
from the red book but the jurisdiction in the red
book shall not be diminished.
The "red book" referred to provides:
It is understood that the jurisdiction of this
contract extends over all printing presses, includ-
ing offset and letter press printing presses, and
associated devices, all work in connection with
offset platemaking, including camera operation,
all dark room work, opaquing and platemaking.
While these jurisdictional clauses of the expired
contract would appear to cover part of the work that
the Employer has assigned to the typographers, it
does not appear to cover the work that immediately
precedes the burning off of the plate, i.e., the
impositioning of the film negatives on the "golden-
rod" which is delivered to the pressmen for the
making of the plate.
In all circumstances, the contracts of both Unions,
including the Pressmen's expired contract, if it had
been extended during the negotiation period, would
r International Association of Machinists, Lodge No 1743, AFL-CIO (J stripping and platemakmg " Thus, it would appear to cover part of the work
A Jones Construction Company), 135 NLRB 1402 the typographers previously had been assigned by the Employer However,
8 This contract was negotiated between the Pressmen and the Albany these terms offer little guidance as a factor to be weighed in a determination
Area Commercial Printers, an employer group including Boyd Under its of this dispute, as they were agreed upon long after the Employer made the
terms it includes " all camera operation , all darkroom work , opaquing , work assignment here in question
PRESSMEN , UNION NO. 23 509
appear to cover part of the work assigned by the
Employer to the typographers . We cannot find that
either of the contracts clearly favors an award to one
party over the other with respect to work designated
as "from the camera to press." On balance , however,
the ATU No. 4 contract appears to cover a greater
part of the tasks actually encompassed by the
Employer ' s work assignment favoring the typogra-
phers.
2. Efficiency , customers demands, quality
and cost control , and historical evolution
The Employer's witness testified that it was found
with a declining business because of the Company's
failure to adopt the faster offset method of printing
as requested by its customers and in particular it had
been warned by its largest customer that the
customer had certain work that was more adaptable
to the faster offset method. The same customer
indicated to the Company that unless it could receive
certain of its orders via the faster offset method, the
Company might lose part of its business.
The Employer in an effort to forestall a further
decline in its business, about a year and a half prior
to the installation of offset printing equipment,
commenced an extensive study of the types of offset
printing that would best suit the Company's and its
customers' needs.9 After completion of its study, the
Company purchased an offset press, a platemaker,
and accessory equipment, and laid out floor plans for
the placing of the new equipment, most of which was
placed in the composing room area.
In addition, the Company, in its study of offset
printing, determined that its typographical employ-
ees possessed the skills and training necessary to
perform the preparatory work prior to the burning
off of the plate and that such preparatory work, to
some extent, requires the same skills as work tasks
performed in the letterpress method. Further, it
determined that the work to be assigned to the
typographers was a substitute for tasks in the
letterpress method and was composing room work.
The Employer also determined that if the work
assignment were made to the pressmen it would
result in a layoff of typographers, but more pressmen
would be required. An assignment to the typogra-
phers, however, would require no layoff of typogra-
phers, but would require more pressmen.io
The Employer's witnesses testified that the com-
posing room is an integrated one in which typogra-
phers from different areas in the composing room are
transferred from one area to another in accordance
with work needs; that the assignment to the
typographers is more economical, makes for greater
efficiency because of a more steady and even flow of
work, and allows for a higher degree of quality
control. Finally, the Employer furnished credible
evidence that there was no clear-cut area practice by
its competitors in the offset printing field which
conflicts with the work assignment here in dispute.ii
Upon consideration of the entire record, we find
that the above-described factors favor an award to
employees represented by ATU.
3. Skills
There was no convincing evidence presented that
either group of craftsmen is more skilled than the
other to perform the disputed preparatory offset
work. There was evidence that in other offset
printing establishments in the area both pressmen
and typographers perform equally well some of the
work in question. This factor is, therefore, of no
assistance in resolving the dispute.
4. Other factors 12
Other factors normally considered as relevant, such
as prior awards, area and industry practice, and past
practice of the Employer, are of little aid in the
resolution of these disputes. None of the Unions
involved in this case has been certified. It appears,
from the record herein, that the Employer's assign-
ment of the preparatory offset work up to the making
of the plate more closely follows the historical
pattern of work tasks performed by typographers in
the composing room of the printing plant as operated
by the Employer herein. The record is entirely silent
with respect to any evidence that would justify a
conclusion that the work assigned by the Employer
to the typographers was historically an evolution or
substitute for skills and tasks performed by press-
men.
5. Conclusion as to merits
On the basis of the foregoing, it is clear that the
relevant factors favor an award of the disputed work
to the typographers. The Employer 's assignment,
efficiency of operation, similarity of tasks to work
9 During the I 1/2-year period that the company made its survey,
business at the Company dropped by about 25 percent due to the lack of
"offset printing" capability
10 It appears that if the preparatory offset work had been assigned to the
pressmen it would have necessitated the layoff of four to eight typographers
and it would have been necessary to hire new pressmen to supplement the
laid-off typographers
11 This is evidenced by Board decisions covering offset work in the same
area Such work is similar to, but not in all cases the same as the work in
question here In each decision , the Board limited the award to the
particular work in dispute See Williams Press, Inc, 186 NLRB No 114,
Williams Press, Inc, 166 NLRB 693, J R Condon & Sons, Inc, 148 NLRB
356
12 It does not appear from the record that the parties have agreed upon
voluntary methods for the adjustment of jurisdictional disputes
510 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
previously performed by typographers, job preserva-
tion, and customer demands, all indicate such a
result . Accordingly, we shall determine the dispute
herein by confirming the Employer' s assignment to
its employees who are represented by the ATU No.
4. In making this determination , we are assigning the
work in question to employees represented by ATU
No. 4, and not to ATU No. 4 or its members.
This award is limited to the work in dispute in this
case.
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the
foregoing findings and the entire record in this case,
the National Labor Relations Board hereby makes
the following Determination of Dispute:
1. Employees employed by Boyd Printing Co.,
Inc., as typographers and currently represented by
Albany Typographical Union No. 4, AFL-CIO, are
entitled to the following work in relation to offset
printing : all preparatory effort work including
camera work and preparation of the "goldenrod"
and delivery of the "goldenrod" to pressmen in the
platemaking area.
2. Albany Printing Pressmen , Assistants and
Offset Workers Union No. 23, AFL-CIO, is not
entitled by means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D)
of the Act to force or require the Employer to assign
the above-described work to pressmen who are
represented by that labor organization.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute , Albany Printing
Pressmen , Assistants and Offset Workers Union No.
23, AFL-CIO, shall notify the Regional Director for
Region 3 whether it will refrain from forcing or
requiring the Employer , by means proscribed in
Section 8 (b)(4)(D), to assign the work in dispute to
employees represented by the Pressmen 's Union
rather than to those represented by Albany Typo-
graphical Union No. 4, AFL-CIO.