The Graphic Arts Association of Washington, D. C., Inc.

In the Matter of THE GRAPHIC ARTS ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON, D. C., INC. ( UNION EMPLOYERS DIVISION ) AND ACORN PRINTERS, INC.; BYRON S. ADAMS; AETNA PRESS: ARROW SERVICE; CASLON PRESS, INC.; CAVALIER PRESS; CORNELIUS PRINTING Co.; RUFUS H_ DARBY PRINTING CO.; DRAKE PRESS; GIBSON BROTIERS, INC.; GRAPHIC ARTS PRESS; JUDD & DETWEILER , INC.; KAUFMAN PRESS, INC.; LAW REPORTER PRINTING CO.; MCARDLE PRINTING Co.; A. C. MELLICHAMPE, PRINTER; E. A. MERKLE, INC. (RANSDELL, INC.) j MT. VERNON PUBLISHING CO.; NATIONAL PUBLISHING CO.; PACK- WOOD PRINTING CO.; PEAKE PRINTERS; POTOMAC ELECTROTYPE CO.; PROGRESSIVE PRINTING CO.; SHEIRY PRESS; STANDARD PRESS, INC.; UNITED PUBLISHING Co., EMPLOYERS and THE WASHINGTON COM- MERCIAL ( PRINTING ) PRESSMEN 'S UNION No . 351, INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA) AFL, PETITIONER In the Matter of THE GRAPHIC ARTS ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON, D. C., INC. ( UNION EMPLOYERS DIVISION ) AND ACORN PRINTERS, INC.; BYRON S. ADAMS; AETNA PRESS j ARROW SERVICE; CASLON PRESS, INC.; CAVALIER PRESS; CORNELIUS PRINTING CO.; RUFUS H. DARBY PRINTING Co.; DRAKE PRESS; GIBSON BROTHERS, INC.; GRAPHIC ARTS PRESS; JUDD & DETWEILER , INC.; KAUFMAN PRESS, INC.; LAW REPORTER PRINTING CO.; MCARDLE PRINTING Co.; A. C. MELLICHAMPE , PRINTER; E. A. MERKLE , INC. (RANSDELL, INC.) ; MT. VERNON PUBLISHING Co.; NATIONAL PUBLISHING CO.; PACK- WOOD PRINTING CO.; PEAKE PRINTERS; POTOMAC ELECTROTYPE CO.; PROGRESSIVE PRINTING CO.; SHEIRY PRESS; STANDARD PRESS, INC.; UNITED PUBLISHING Co., EMPLOYERS and PRINTING PRESSMEN'S UNION No. 1 OF WASHINGTON , D. C., AFFILIATED WITH INTERNA- TIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS ' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER Cases Nos. 5-RC-550 and 5-RC-631.-Decided September 28, 1950 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before David C. Sachs, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 91 NLRB No. 92. 565 566 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Murdock and Styles]. Upon the entire record,' the Board finds : 1. The Employers 2 are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employers.3 3. At the hearing, the International and Local 351 moved to dismiss the petition in Case No. 5-RC-631, filed by Printing Pressmen's Union No. 1 of Washington, D. C., herein called Local 1,4 and in addition sought to deny Local 1 a place on the ballot in any election directed herein, on the ground that jurisdiction over the employees concerned had been awarded to Local 351 by the International. Ruling on these motions was referred to the Board. The motions are denied. As we have frequently held, the authority of a bargaining agent must be sought in the employees' consent and not in the extent of a union's jurisdiction. Inasmuch as some of the employees involved have desig- nated Local 1 as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, we find that it is competent to represent these employees. And because it appears that effective resolution of the existing juris- dictional dispute between these two labor organizations cannot be had without resort to the administrative processes of the Act, we are con- strained to proceed with the investigation and shall accord Local 1 a place on the ballot in the election directed herein.5 We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. We find, in accord with the agreement of the parties, that all printing pressmen and registered apprentice pressmen employed by the members of the Graphic Arts Association of Washington, D. C., 1 The request for oral argument made by International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, AFL, herein called the International , is hereby denied as the record and briefs adequately present the positions of the parties. 2 The Employers ' names appear in the caption as amended at the hearing. All of the individual Employers named are currently members of the Graphic Arts Association of Washington, D. C., Inc. ( Union Employers Division). 3 The petition in Case No. 5-RC-550 was originally filed by the International . However, at the hearing, the International moved to substitute The Washington Commercial ( Print- ing) Pressmen 's Union No . 351, herein called Local 351, as the Petitioner in that case. This motion was granted by the hearing officer. The hearing officer then permitted the International to intervene in the proceedings in support of the petition of Local 351. 4 The units requested in Case No . 5-RC-631, filed by Local 1, and in Case No: 5-RC-550, originally filed by the International , are identical. 6 See Grinnell Company of the Pacific, 71 NLRB 1370, and cases cited therein ; Honolulu Rapid Transit Company, Ltd., 85 NLRB 1077 ; Association of Motion Picture Producers, _ nc., 88 NLRB 621 ; cf . Puerto Rico Steamship Association, 90 NLRB 1877. THEI GRAPHIC ARTS ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON, D. C. 567 Inc. (Union Employers' Division), excluding newspaper web pressmen now covered by a contract between the Newspaper Web Printing Press- men's Union No. 6 and the Graphic Arts Association of Washington, D. C., Inc., office clerical employees and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar- gaiiing within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act 6 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.]. fi This unit, in substance, conforms with that covered by the agreement between the Employers and Local 1, which expired on February 10, 1950.