San Francisco Typographical Union No. 21

SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21 San Francisco Typographical Union No. 21, Interna- tional Typographical Union, AFL-CIO and Califor- nia Newspapers, Inc. d/b/a/ San Rafael Independent Journal and The Emporium-Capwell Corporation. Cases 20-CC-987 and 20-CC-988 February 24, 1971 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN, AND JENKINS On October 22, 1970, Trial Examiner Leo F. Light- ner issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceed- ing, finding that the Respondent had engaged in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirma- tive action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Decision and a supporting brief, the General Counsel filed cross- exceptions and a supporting brief, and the Charging Party, California Newspapers, Inc., filed a brief. 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 powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no preju- dicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Decision, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings.' conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner, as herein modified. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Rela- tions Board adopts as its Order the Recommended Order of the Trial Examiner as modified below and hereby orders that the Respondent, San Francisco Typographical Union No. 21, International Typo- graphical Union, AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall take the action set forth in the Trial Examiner's Recommended Order? 'In the ninth full paragragh of section I of the Trial Examiner's Findings and Conclusions, Emporium should be listed among those employers that are engaged in commerce In footnote 20 of the Trial Examiner's Decision , substitute "20" for "10" days TRIAL EXAMINER'S DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE 673 LEO F. LIGHTNER, Trial Examiner: This proceeding was heard before me in San Francisco, California, on Juy 28 and 29, 1970, on the complaint of General Counsel, as amended, and the answer, as amended, of San Francisco Typographical Union No. 21, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, herein referred to as Respondent.' The complaint alleges violations of Section 8(b)(4Xii)(B) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 1947, as amended, (61 Stat. 136, 73 Stat. 519, 29 U.S.C. Section 151 et. seq.), herein called the Act. The parties waived oral argument and briefs filed by the General Coun- sel and the Charging Party, California Newspapers Inc., have been carefully considered.2 Upon the entire record,3 and from my observations of the witnesses, I make the following: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYERS California Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a/ San Rafael Inde- pendent Journal, herein I.J., is a California corporation which, at all times material herein , has been engaged in the publication of a daily newspaper known as the San Rafael Independent Journal, in San Rafael, California. During the year preceding the issuance of the complaint herein , a repre- sentative period, I.J. received gross revenues in excess of $200,000 from the sales of newspapers and advertising ap• peanng in said newspapers . During the same period, I.J. has been a subscriber to Associated Press and United Press International, each of which is an interstate news service. During the year preceding the issuance of the complaint, in the course and conduct of its business, I.J. has purchased and received goods and services valued in excess of $50,000 at its San Rafael plant, directly from sources located outside the State of California. The Emporium is a California corporation, engaged in retail merchandising at department stores located in various California cities, including two in San Francisco, at 835 Market Street and 1 Stonestown, and one in San Rafael at 1000 North Gate Fashion Mall. Arden-Mayfair Incorporated, herein referred to as May- fair, is a California corporation engaged in the operation of retail food supermarkets at various California locations in- cluding one at 7th and H Streets in San Rafael. Lucky Stores, Inc., herein called Lucky, is a California corporation engaged in the operation of retail food super- markets at various California locations including one at 720 Center Street in Fairfax, California. Big G Supermarkets, Inc., herein called the Big G, is a California corporation engaged in the operation of retail food supermarkets at various California locations, includ- ing one at 100 Harbor Drive, Sausalito, and one at 5651 1 The charge herein, in Case 20-CC-987, was filed on April 9. The charge herein, in Case 20-CC-988, was filed on April 14, and amended on April 24. A consolidated complaint was issued on June 3, and amended dung the hearing herein . All dates herein are 1970 unless otherwise indicated 2 Respondent advised by letter that it was not filing a brief but was relying on the Supreme Court decision in what is commonly referred to as the Tree Fruits case, set forth and considered infra. 3 The record is corrected in the following particulars : p. 11, 1. 8, strike "port," substitute "Board", p 127,1 9 and 21, strike "Santa Benicia," substi- tute "Santa Venetia " In addition, where the word "prescribed" appears it should be stricken and the word "proscribed" substituted. 188 NLRB No. 108 674 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Paradise Drive, Corte Madera. Cala Foods, Inc., herein called Cala, is a California cor- poration engaged in the operation of retail food supermar- kets at various California locations including 2 Freeway, Corte Madera, and 750 Adrian Way, Santa Venetia. Longs Drug Stores, Incorporated, herein called Longs, is a California corporation engaged in the operation of retail drug stores at various California locations, including 880 St. Francis Drake Blvd., San Anselmo, and 442 Los Gallinas Avenue, San Rafael. Petrini's Meat Incorporated, herein called Petrini's, is a California corporation engaged in the operation of retail food supermarkets at various California locations including 270 Bon Air Shopping Center, Greenbrae. The consolidated complaint alleges, the answer admits, and I find that I.J. is, and at all times material herein has been, an employer engaged in commerce and in operations affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act. The consolidated complaint alleges, the answer admits, and I find, that employers Mayfair, Lucky, Big G, Cala, Longs, and Petrim's are, and at all times mate- rial herein have been, engaged in commerce or in operations affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. II RESPONDENT IS A LABOR ORGANIZATION The consolidated complaint alleges, the answer admits, and I find that Respondent at all times material herein is and has been, a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. been reached. As a result, on January 7, the Respondent instituted strike action against I.J. and, on that date, picket lines were established at the premises of said employer and picketing at that location has been in effect at all times since, up to and including the time of the hearing. Respon- dent, by said strike action, seeks a new collective-bargaining agreement covering the unit described. It is undisputed that the Union represented a majority of the employees in said unit at the time of the commencement of the strike. PICKETING AND HANDBILLING - MARCH 17 THROUGH JUNE 23 Except where otherwise noted, the facts set forth in this section are undisputed. The events herein are set forth chronologically. Respondent, on March 17, placed four individuals at the two entrances to Longs, at its San Anselmo location. Two of these individuals carried picket signs. The legend on one side of the sign read: DON'T BUY products advertised by LONGS DRUGS in UNFAIR I-J on the reverse side, the legend read: III THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES THE ISSUE The principal issue raised by the pleadings and litigated at the hearing is whether the Respondent, as more fully set forth in the complaint, engaged in conduct in contravention of the provisions of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) by picketing The Emporium, Mayfair, Lucky, Big G, Cala, Longs, or Petrini's, or any of them, on or after March 17, with an object of said picketing being to force or require The Empo- rium, Mayfair, Lucky, Big G, Cala, Longs or Petrini's, or any of them, to cease doing business with I.J. Respondent, by answer, asserts that the picketing was informational picketing and denies the commission of any unfair labor practice. AGENCY The consolidated complaint alleges, during the hearing Respondent admitted, and I find relative to the conduct complained of herein, that Leon Olson, president, John De- Martini, vice president, Jim Bachich, secretary-treasurer, and Don Abrams, organizer, are, and at all times material herein were, agents of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act. BACKGROUND The facts set forth under this section are undisputed. Respondent has had a collective-bargaining relationship with I.J. for an unspecified number of years, during which Respondent has represented a unit comprised of the com- posing room employees. Following the expiration of their most recent collective-bargaining agreement, said parties entered into negotiations; however, no new agreement has DON'T BUY these products sold by LONGS DRUGS. The cardboard portion of all picket signs referred to herein were uniformly 22 inches in height and 14 inches in width. The capitalized portions varied from 2-3 inches in height. The caption, on the reverse side, occupied the upper- most 9 inches. An ad of Longs appearing in I.J., or a Xerox copy, was attached below the legend. Neither the placard used at Longs on March 17 nor a picture of it is in evidence. There is, however, a placard to which a substantially full- page ad of Longs is attached, dated April 14, advertising sales through April 19, which has been doubled over, by reason of the limited space available to attach it to the placard, with the result that many of the advertised items are not displayed or visible. Printed identification of the trade names of products advertised, such as "Aunt Jemi- ma," "Wyandotte," "Jeno's," and "Mennen", were in letter- ing approximating 3/16 of an inch, visible only upon close inspection under good lighting conditions. The other two individuals at Longs on March 17 were distributing a pamphlet which read: Please do not patronize ... LONG'S DRUG STORES By continuing to advertise in the STRUCK INDEPENDENT-JOURNAL they are encouraging importation of strikebreakers and SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21 675 destruction of decent working conditions of long-time employees. This firm has been informed of our differences with the Independent-Journal, and our desire to negotiate, but continues to use this unfair newspaper for advertising. All of organized labor in Marin County and the Bay Area sanctions and supports our strike. We are allowed by law to inform the public of merchants who continue to advertise in an unfair paper. As a customer we request you not to pur- chase at this store until they agree to remove their advertising from the UNFAIR INDEPENDENT-JOURNAL TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21 701 Mission Avenue, San Rafael, California This activity was conducted for approximately 5 or 6 hours on March 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21.It is obscure whether the Longs San Anselmo store was picketed after March 21. It is undisputed that this store and all other stores enu- merated herein were open to the public at all times when picketing was being conducted. When picketing and hand- billing occurred they were simultaneous. On March 20, Respondent caused an unspecified number of individuals to handbill Longs' San Rafael location. The handbill was identical to the one used at Longs' Anselmo location, supra. Commencing March 21, and continuing for an unspec- ified period thereafter, Respondent caused Longs' San-Ra- fael store to be subjected to picketing, as well as handbilling. The placard carried by the pickets was of the type described, su ra. The picketing was accompanied by the distribution ofPhandbills carrying the text set forth, supra. On April 2, Respondent caused three individuals to pick- et and handbill the entrances to Mayfair in San Rafael. The side of the picket sign containing only a legend was identical to that set forth, supra, except the words "MAYFAIR MARKETS" replaced the words "LONG'S DRUGS." However, the legend on the top of the reverse side read. THIS AD is helping UNFAIR I-J The word "Mayfair" appears clearly in a closeup picture of the ad attached to the picket sign. The ad, as that at Longs, has been folded over and some of the picketed items are thus not discernible. It is reasonable to conclude that the public could not identify the particular type of fresh carrots and link sausage being picketed, nor the identity of an item on sale at the price of 69 cents. These are the only visible items. The handbill distributed is identical to the handbill set forth, supra, except the words "MAYFAIR MAR- KETS" replaced the words "LONG'S DRUG STORES.". Respondent, on April 2, placed two individuals at each of the two entrances to Big 0 in Sausalito, who distributed handbills identical in content to the handbill distributed at Longs, set forth supra, except the words "LONG'S DRUG STORES" were replaced with the words "BIG G SUPER." Commencing April 3, Respondent caused from four to six individuals to conduct picketing, while as many as four or six others would distribute handbills at said store's entranc- es. The legend appearing on the picket sign , on the one side, was identical to that described supra, as the picket sign used at Mayfair, except that the words "MAYFAIR MAR- KETS' were replaced with the word "BIG G SUPER." On the reverse side, which was identical to the reverse side of the Mayfair picket sign , there appeared a copy of the adver- tisement of said store appearing in I-J , or a Xerox copy. The picket sign, used on April 3, carried a folded over copy of an ad. While trade names "Northern Jumbo , " "Bordens," and "Swansons" are visible upon very close inspection, the trade name of the orange juice advertised and the identity of many other advertised items is obscure. Similarly, picket signs carried on later dates, one of which is in evidence as are pictures of other signs, permit no doubt that the ad is either a full page, or approximate thereof, and was folded over, thereby obscuring many of the advertised items. Trade names appearing on the placard , such as "Del Monte," "Bonnie Hubbard," and "Chef Boy-Ar-Dee," are in print of a smaller size than lower case typing on a standard typewrit- er. Respondent's picketing and handbilling continued on an average of 4 or 5pdays each week through April for periods extending usually from 10 a.m. to noon or T p.m., with the pickets returning either at 2 p.m., and remaining for 2 or 3 hours, or at 6 p .m. and remaining until 8 p .m. Usually there were 3 or 4 persons carrying pickets signs , and the other individuals, not exceeding 10, distributed handbills. Commencing approximately April 29, Respondent changed the language of the handbill being distributed at the Big G Sausalito store . The opening phrase was changed from `Please do not patronize . . . " to "Please do not buy products advertised by." This was followed with the identity of the store being handbilled and picketed and the identical language set forth at length , supra, as having been distrib- uted at Longs on March 17th. 4Thereafter, continuing until approximately June 23, Respondent caused the handbilling and the simultaneous picketing to continue on approxi- mately 3 or 4 days each week. During the same period , on alternate weeks apparently commencing approximately April 2 and continuing until approximately May 15 at the Big G Corte Madera location, the picket sign was one of the two described . The handbill was identical with the handbill distributed at Longs, until the modification of approximately April 29. The number of individuals carrying picket signs was customarily three or four, with an additional number , not to exceed a total of ten, which number included the pickets, distributing handbills. Respondent, on April 10, caused five individuals to hand- bill Lucky's store in Fairfax. The handbill is identical to that used at Longs, set forth su ra, except the second line reads: "LUCKY STORES , INC," in place of "LONG'S DRUG STORES." On April 11 , Respondent placed approximately seven individuals at the same location , an unspecified num- ber of whom carried picket signs, identical to the picket sign set forth supra, used at Longs, except the words "LUCKY STORES" replaced the words "LONG'S DRUGS." The remaining individuals distributed handbills of the type de- scribed. It is obscure whether either picketing or handbilling 4 At some point in time, picket signs appeared with the rearrangement of the sequence of words, which I find to be of no consequence. I have set forth, supra, the language of the Longs' picket sign as "Don't Buy Products Adver- tised by [BIG G SUPER] in Unfair I-J " The rearranged placard read "Don't Buy Products advertised in the Independent-Journal by BIG G SUPER" This latter type of picket sign appears to have been used exclusively at The Emporium and Petrim's, while both types appear to have been used at Cala and Big G, as set forth in more detail, infra. 676 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD was conducted at this location after April 11.5 that the legend appearing on one side reads the same as the On Aril 10, Respondent commenced picketing and rearranged sign that was used at Big G. The legend was: handbilling The Emporium store at what is known as the North Gate Shoppin Center, and is also identified as Terra Linda, in San Rafael This activity commenced at approxi- mately 6 p.m. and continued until 9 p.m. John Grillo, pro- tection manager for the store, credibly related that he saw a group of approximately 200 individuals gathered for the activity described. However, he acknowledged that at most only half of the grow engaged in picketing and handbilling at any given time. He estimated that there were from 10 to 20 pickets at each of the five entrances, while the balance dispersed and went either into the shops or restaurants. David A. Huberty, store manager, corroborated Grillo. It is undisputed that Olson, Respondent's president, De- Martini, Respondent's vice president, and Abrams, Respondent's organizer, were present, participated in, and directed the picketing and handbilling activities on this oc- casion. Grillo related comments made to customers by the indi- viduals who were either carrying picket signs or accompany- ing those who were carrying picket signs, or were distributing handbills. These comments included: Don't shop here; The Emporium believes in unfair labor prac- tices; Shop at Macys; Anyone shopping here is a scab. Grillo could not recall any reference being made to any product which was advertised in I.J. Huberty related com- ments he heard being made by the individuals described, as including: Please don't shop here; Please don't patronize this store; This store is closed tonight; The Emporium be- lieves in unfair labor; Only scabs shop here; Working peo- ple don't shop here; Anyone who shops here is a scab. Pictures of the picket signs used on this occasion reflect DON'T BUY products advertised in the Independent- Journal by The Emporium The legend on the reverse side of the placard reads: THIS AD is helping UNFAIR I-J The ad attached below the legend appears to have been stapled in the middle, and the wind conditions appear to have caused the paper containing the ad, on most of the placards, to be folded over so that its content was obliterat- ed and indiscernible. Two distinct handbills were distributed. One was identi- cal to the handbill distributed at Longs, on March 17, set forth, supra, with the words "THE EMPORIUM" replacing the words "LONG'S DRUG STORES." The second hand- bill carried the following content: 10 MOST WANTED BY ORGANIZED LABOR To STOP Advertising in the LONGS DRUGS GRAND AUTO STORES SAFEWAY STORES MONTGOMERY WARD CO. MAYFAIR MARKETS OFFENSE [hand] UNFAIR Independent-Journal PETRINI'S MARKETS EMPORIUM PENNEY'S DISCO DEPARTMENT STORE CALA FOOD STORES Advertising in the UNFAIR Independent-Journal. The revenue from advertising in the Independent- Journal is supporting professional strike-breakers, rent-a- tac squads and the Independent-Journal's resolute union-busing program. DESCRIPTION [hand] This monopoly newspaper embarked on its union- busting program a year-and-a-half ago. Armed "security" guards were installed in the plant prior to the expiration of the last contract on November 2, 1968 , and 15 months BEFORE the strike. Also during that time, "replacement" personnel was secretly trained on weekends and after working hours to perform the work of long-time loyal, skilled employees. Neither the placard carried by the pickets nor a picture of said placard is in evidence . Thus, there is no evidence from which it may be concluded that the product or products being picketed was or was not identifiable by 6 Each [hand] is a picture of a hand, with all fingers folded except the index the general public. finger, the latter is used as a pointer SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21 WARNING [hand] The Independent-Journal never bargained in good faith during that period . They made a series of demands upon the Union on a "take-it -or-leave-it" basis . These demands would destroy conditions enjoyed by employees for as much as 50 years. These 10 offenders are dangerous . Their continued advertising in the UNFAIR Independent-Journal could lead to the destruction of your working conditions and the economic welfare of Marin County and the Bay Area. You are advised to use caution and not to approach their stores! Do Not shop at the 10 Most Wanted! REWARD [hand ] Economic pressure resulting from removal of advertising from the Independent-Journal may force the Independent-Journal to begin serious negotiations . Honest bargaining will end the dispute. Peace and economic security could return to Marin County. For further information : TYPOGRAHICAL UNION NO. 21 710 Mission Avenue---San Rafael 454-8697 26 Third St., Room 253---San Francisco 421--6723 The latter handbill was distributed in the North Gate Shop- ping Center at other places in addition to the entrances to e' Emporium. The picketing and handbilling occurred simultaneously? On April 18, Respondent caused picketing and handbill- ing to occur, between the hours of I I a.m. and 3 p.m. at The Emporium Market Street store, in San Francisco. Paul Ehrenfned, manager of labor relations for said store, credibly related that he observed approximately 60 mdivid- uals who were either carrying picket signs or were distrib- uting handbills, of whom approximately 40 were marching in separate circles at the three Market Street public entranc- es and the remaining 20 were approximately evenly divided into two circles at the two public entrances on Jesse Street. The legend on the two sides of the picket signs were identi- cal to the legend on the two sides of the picket signs used at The Emporium North Gate store, set forth supra. While the ads affixed to the picket signs, reflected by pictures taken at the site of the picketing on that date, might permit an inference that the advertised products were not identifia- ble, I find it unnecessary to make such a conclusion, in the light of all the evidence herein. One ad attached to such a placard, and used at one or more unspecified Emporium stores 8 reflect an ad of a Grundig AM-FM portable transistor radio. It is highly un- likely that a passerby, even in good sunlight, could de- termine with certainty the identity of the article, or product, if the placard was being carried while a picket was moving The date of this ad was April 27 and concededly it was use on a picket placard, for an unspecified number of days thereafter. Three other ads, which it may be inferred appeared in I.J., on approximately May 25 and were camel on separate placards thereafter at one or all of the three Emporium 7 In view of the undisputed facts found herein , I reject Charging Party California Newspapers Exhs I and 2 These exhibits at most recite efforts Respondent intended to institute to "persuade" advertisers to discontinue advertising in I.J Such activity is not per se violative of the Act 8Confined, nevertheless, to the three Emporium stores listed and identified herein 677 stores with which we are concerned herein, consist of the following: One item displays four products of "Sony": (a) an AM alarm clock radio, (b) an AM/FM transistor radio, (c) a pocket table AM transistor radio, and (d) an AM/FM alarm clock radio, as well as two Grundig radios. It can not be said with certainty that these products were or were not discernible by a passerby since much would depend on lighting conditions which obviously varied herein from bright sunlight to artificial illumination at night. It would appear that an ad confined to a Zenith color T.V. permitted identification of the product. An ad confined to a "Roux Fancy-Full Rinse" is in print too small to permit identifica- tion except upon close inspection, which I find an unlikely condition during a period of active picketing. Ehrenfried related that the group engaged in picketing or handbilling on April 18 addressed themselves to passers by, whom it must be assumed included potential customers, with such remarks as: Scab; Don't cross the picket line; Don't shop at The Emporium; The Emporium supports slave labor; The Emporium is taking food out of the mouths of babies; All working people should not shop at The Em- ponum; Stay out; You are-hurting yourself by shopping at The Emporium; Yourjobs are at stake; Keep San Francisco a union town; The Emporium supports strike breakers; and The Emporium is unfair? 9 I find it unnecessary to consider or pass upon the assertion of Ehrenfned that a majority of the pickets on Market Street, on April 18, at about 12 noon, sought to block the Westerly Market Street entrance, to prevent the public from ingress or egress. I do not, on the basis of this record, have any reason to doubt that a congested condition may have existed from 12 noon until 12 :20, as appears undisputed from the recitation of Ehrenfned However , it is undisputed that the condition was remedied forthwith upon the arrival of San Francisco police, who had been called by officials of the store. The record establishes that there were at least four entrances to the store where the public could move in and out without any unusual inconvenience Ehrenfned acknowl- edged that the public was able to move in and out of the western Market Street entrance even during the time complained of, but with less than its customary ease of movement I am unable to deduce anything more than what has been frequently termed as "animal exuberance" on the part of the pickets, as distinguished from a part of Respondent to effectively physically preclude the free move- ment of the public into or out of this store 678 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The pamphlet distributed by Respondent's representa- tives on April 18 at The Emporiums Market Street store was identical to that distributed on April 10 at the San Rafael store.1° On April 29, Don Abrams, together with approximately 40 individuals, arrived at The Emponum Stonestown store, San Francisco; 20 to 25 of them carried picket signs and the balance distributed handbills. The picket signs are identical, to the extent the legend appeared, with those previously used on April 10 in San Rafael and on April 18 on Market Street, at the respective stores of The Emponum, set forth supra. The handbill distributed contained the same content as the handbill distributed at Longs, on March 17, except that the first line was modified, as I have indicated supra, effective Aril 29, so that the wording "Please do not pa- tronize ... was replaced with the wording "Please do not buy products advertised by." Immediately following this introductory remark the words "THE EMPORIUM" re- placed the words "LONG'S DRUG STORES." On May 1, Respondent engaged in the same picketing and handbilling at The Emporium, San Rafael store, as they had engaged in on April 29 at The Emponum, Stonestown store. However, the number of pickets and the number of those distributing handbills is obscure. The pictures reflect- or the ads attached to the picketing placards are not of sufficient quality to permit a conclusion that the products being picketed were or were not identifiable. It is undisput- ed that the pamphlets being distributed did not identify specific products, but related solely to the fact of advertising in I.J. On May 18, Respondent placed approximately seven or eight pickets, who conducted both picketing and handbill- ing at Cala's Corte Madera store. The handbills distributed were the same as the handbill distributed at The Emporium's Stonestown store, on April 29, which con- tained the modification in the opening fine of "Please do not buy products advertised by." Immediately following those words the identity of "The Emporium" was replaced with "Cala Food Stores." The precise placard and the ad at- tached thereto is not reflected by the evidence relative to any date prior to June 8. Thereafter, on May 19 and 20 both picketing and handbilling of this store were conducted by Respondent. After May 20, this activity continued 3 or 4 days each week, for periods of 2 to 3 hours on each occasion, until June 23. Commencing June 12, this activity occurred at Cala's Santa Venetia store." A placard in evidence, used as a picket sign at Cala Foods on or after June 16, as well as pictures which are closeups of said tear-out sheets, reveal that the ad is folded over in such a way to obscure many items advertised, and the trade 10 In the light of the content of the pamphlet for reasons explicated infra, I find it unnecessary to extend this decision by giving consideration to the recitation of James R Hamblin, staff newsman at KCBS radio station Hamblin related a conversation with an individual whom Hamblin did not know, who purportedly was an individual named Olson, and who related as an object of the picketing a proscribed object. Assuming the credibility of Hamblin, this evidence at best, if it may be considered at all, is merely cumulative Use of this evidence would require extended explication I I While there is evidence of similar activity by Respondent at Cala Foods, Fairfax store , there is no allegation in the complaint relative to Cala Foods at Fairfax At the outset of the hearing, upon motion, General Counsel was permitted to amend the complaint to add specific stores which had not been included in the original complaint At the same time , as a matter of fair hearing, names of numerous advertised items are identifiable only upon close inspection and with good lighting conditions. It is therefore reasonable to conclude these products could not have been accurately identified by the general public at the time and place of the picketing. On June 15, and on succeeding days through June 19, and also on June 22, Respondent caused picketing and handbill- ing activity at Petrini's in Greenbrae. The handbills distrib- uted were identical to the handbills distributed at The Emporium, at Stonestown, on April 29, except the word "Petrini's," replaced the words "The Emporium." A closeup picture of the picket sign reveals that the ad is folded over, thus obscuring many of the items advertised. In addition, since the picture appears to be a closeup, it appears unlikely that the particular products being picketed could be iden- tified by the public. I find accordingly. All picket signs were made of cardboard, and mounted on wood for stability and ease of carrying. The cardboard ap- proximated 22 inches in height and 14 inches in width. On one side, the words Don't Buy approximated 3 inches in height, the words Independent and Journal were each 2 1/8 inches, and the store name varied from 2 inches to 3 inches. On the reverse side the legend occupied approximately 7 to 7 1/2 inches, with either an actual newspaper ad or a Xerox copy. Thus ads over 15 inches in length were folded over. 12 CONCLUDING FINDINGS It appears undisputed, and I have found, with exceptions noted, that substantially all handbilling was accompanied by picketing. These activities occurred only when the partic- ular store was open to the public, and only at pub 'c en- trances. No effort to identify the product or products being picketed appears in any handbill. Prior to April 29, by hand- bill, Respondent requested the public "Please do not pa- tronize . . . [name of advertiser]" and concluded, "As a customer we request you not to purchase at this store until they agree to remove their advertising from the UNFAIR INDEPENDENT-JOURNAL." After April 29, Respon- dent modified the opening greeting to read, "Please do not buy products advertised by [name of advertiser]," with no other change in the conclusion, or in the body of the hand- bill. What might be termed the second handbill, styled "10 MOST WANTED," advised the public, inter alia, ` You are advised to use caution and not to approach [listed advertis- ers] stores." Included among the 10 names are Longs, May- fair, Petnni's, The Emporium, and Cala. Similarly, with the one exception of a Zenith color TV during some unspecified picketing at one or more locations of The Emporium, the Respondent did not adequately iden- tify, to the public, the products being picketed.13 While confined to The Emporium stores, on the dates found supra, the remarks of those picketing were unques- tionably addressed to a total boycott, not limited to adver- tised products. General Counsel was advised by the Trial Examiner that only the activities alleged in the complaint would be considered in determining whether or not the evidence would sustain a finding of a violation of the Act Accordingly the exhibits which relate solely to Cala Foods, Fairfax store, i.e., General Counsel's Exhibits 14(a) and 14(b) are rejected as being neither material nor relevant 12 The length of an I J. page approximates 22 inches 13 In so finding, I exclude the picketing at Lucky on April 11, for reasons explicated supra SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21 679 The initial question to be resolved is whether the picket- ing herein was primary or secondary . I find it was second- arThe Supreme Court has stated that the congressional ob- jective underlying the secondary boycott provisions of the Act was "shielding unoffending employers and others from pressures in controversies not their own." N L.R.B. v. Den- ver Building & Construction Trades Council, 341 U.S. 675, 692. Respondent relies on the "product picketing" concept enunciated by the Supreme Court in what is commonly known as the Tree Fruits case, 14 wherein the Respondent sought a boycott of the primary employers product (Wash- ington apples), at the situs of a secondary employer (Safe- way). In Tree Fruits, the court delineated the distinction be- tween permissible product ppicketing and proscribed second- ary boycott. The court, finding that not all secondary picketing is proscribed, stated , inter aka: . that it would not ascribe to Congress a purpose to outlaw peaceful picketing unless "there is the clearest indication in the legislative history" that Congress so intended, Id., at p. 63. . All that the legislative history shows in the way of an "isolated evil" believed to require proscription of peaceful consumer picketing at secondary sites, was its use to persuade customers of a secondary employer to cease trading with him in order to force him to cease dealing with, or to put pressure upon, the primary em- ployer. This narrow focus reflects the difference be- tween such conduct and peaceful picketing at the secondary site directed only at the struck product. In the later case, the Union's appeal to the public is con- fined to its dispute with the primary employer , since the public is not asked to withhold its patronage from the secondary employer, but only to boycott the primary employer's goods. On the other hand , a union appeal to the public at the secondary site not to trade at all with the secondary employer goes beyond the goods of the pnmary employer , and seeks the public's assistance in forcing the secondary employer to cooperate with the union in its primary dispute . Id., at p . 63-64. Peaceful consumer picketing to shut off all trade with the secondary employer unless he aids the Union in its dispute with the primary employer is poles apart from such picketing which only persuades his custom- ers not to buy the struck product. Id. at p. 70 The court held: When consumer picketin g is em- ployed only to persuade customers not to buy the struck product, the Union's appeal is closely confined to the primary dispute . The site of the appeal is expand- ed to include the premises of the secondary employer, but if the appeal succeeds , the secondary employer's purchases from the struck firms are decreased only because the public has diminished its purchases of the struck product. On the other hand , when consumer picketing is employed to persuade customers not to trade at all with the secondary employer , the latter stops buying the struck product , not because of a f ail- ing demand, but in response to pressure designed to inflict injury on his business generally. In such case, the Union does more than merely follow the struck prod- uct; it creates a separate dispute with the secondary employer. Id., at p. 72. In the Great Western Broadcasting case,15 the Board, with 14 N L R B v Fruit Packers Local 760, 377 U S 58 15 Great Western Broadcasting Corp v N L R B, 356 F 2d 434 (C A 9) court approval, held that one who is engaged in the business of advertising tangible articles manufactured by another is likewise a "producer" of such products , and that a union may, pursuant to the "publicity proviso of Section 8(b)(4), handbill a neutral employer who thereafter handles or offers for sale the advertised products ; that the term "producer" encompasses anyone who enhances the economic value of the product ultimately sold or consumed ; that the television station, the primary employer by adding its service (adver- tising) to the products involved, became a producer of such products. In the Honolulu Typographical case,16 the Board, with court approval, held that by handbilling, or by publicity other than picketing, a union may seek a complete consum- er boycott of a neutral employer , but that product picketing violates Section 8(b)(4) if an object thereof is to stop all trade with such secondary employer. General Counsel correctly urges that the picket signs were inadequate to bring them within the "product picketing" enunciated by the Supreme Court in Tree Fruits, supra. In support of this contention , General Counsel relies upon the Board decisions in the Atlanta Typographical and Los Ange- les Typographical cases." In the Atlanta case the Board noted: The General Counsel contends that the message of the signs used here , calling for a boycott of "advertised products" without specifically naming those products, is tantamout to an appeal to the customers not to pa- tronize the neutral stores generally , and, thus, a viola- tion of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B). He asserts that Respon- dent has not met its burden of identifying the struck products at the secondary situs by having some of the pickets carry the advertisements on their person, since even the advertisements which were carried were shown only to those customers who inquired. There- fore, the General Counsel urges , potential customers, seeing signs and wishing to cooperate with the Union would have no choice but to refrain from all trade with the store picketed. Respondent defends its approach of limiting the picket signs designation as "the products advertised in the struck newspaper" on the ground that no attempt was made to cause a cessation of customer trade in other products of the neutral employers, and asserting that further specificity in product identification would not have been practical because the neutral employers "advertise hundreds of items in a newspaper during a given week, and frequently change the items adver- tised." It argues that it took all reasonable precautions to limit its appeal to the struck product by having the pickets carry copies of current advertisements on their person ready to show any inquiring customer and could not reasonably be expected to have its picket signs fully and accurately reflect the advertisements carried in the struck newspaper . Id., TXD. The Board held, inter alia: Had Respondent con- fined its picketing activity at secondary sites to an ap- peal against the purchase of the struck newspaper, the necessary precautions would have been fairly simple. When it elected instead to attempt to establish a coun- tervailing weapon against the drawing power of the newspaper for the product advertised therein it as- 16 Honolulu Typographical Union No 37, AFL-CIO, (Hawaii Press Newspa- pers, Inc), 167 NLRB 1030, enfd 401 F 2d 952 (CA D.C) 17 Atlanta Typographical Union No 48 (Times-Journal, Inc), 180 NLRB No 164, Los Angeles Typographical Union (White Front Stores, Inc), 181 NLRB No 61 680 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sumed the added burden of pursuing such a course in a manner to insure that its actions would not affect the secondary employer's business beyond the sale of the product advertised. The test is not Respondent's good faith in the matter, but whether its activity actually transgresses into the area of "isolated evil. And we cannot permit a union to shift its burden of struck product identification to the public to which it is ap- pealing for support .... While the picket signs called or a boycott of the struck products only, the failure of the signs to intelligibly identify those products, effec- tively converted the appeal to one of a total boycott. . The prohibitions of 8(b)(4)(B) (sic) are applicable unless the picket signs themselves adequately inform potential customers of the action they are asked to take. 18 In the Los Angeles Typographical Union case, supra, the Board asserted, inter alia: Although the publicity proviso has been interpreted to sanction handbilling to stop all trading; yet, where handbilling and literature distribution accompany picketing, and particularly picketing with signs that lack clarity and specificity as exists in the instant case, the intent and purpose of the picketing can be and must be interpreted by the statements that accompany it. I find, for the reasons stated: That I.J. is a "producer" of products advertised in its newspaper; that Respondent could, by reason of the publicity proviso, publicize by hand- bill or otherwise, except by picketing, the advertisers listed herein, with truthful information to persuade the customers of each to stop all trading with that store; however, permis- sible product picketing is limited to "products" advertised and adequately identified on picket signs, and cannot en- compass the entire business of the secondary employer. I have found that the picket signs used herein, with one single exception, failed to meet these requirements. Accordingly, for the reasons stated, I find that by the picketing complained of at The Emporium, Mayfair, Big G, Cala, Longs, and Petrini's, Respondent sought to induce the customers of each to refrain from all trade with said second- ary employers, and I further find an object of said picketing was to force said persons to cease advertising in and doin business with I.J., in contravention of the proscriptions of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of Respondent set forth in section III, above, occurring in connection with the operations of The Emporium, Mayfair, Big G, Cala, Longs, and Petrini's, set forth in section I, above, have a close , intimate, and sub- stantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V THE REMEDY Having found that Respondent, San Francisco Typo- graphical Union No. 21, International Typographical Un- ion, AFL-CIO, and its agents have engaged in certain unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act, I will recommend that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action de- signed to effectuate the policies of the Act. 18 Accord Los Angeles Typographical Union, supra Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, I make the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. California Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a San Rafael Inde- pendent-Journal, TheEmporium-Capwell Corporation, Ar- den-Mayfair incorporated, Big G Supermarkets , Inc., Cala Foods, Inc., Longs Drug Stores, Incorporated, and Petrini's Meat, Incorporated, are each employers enga ed in com- merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) and Sec- tion 8(b)(4) of the Act. 2. San Francisco Typographical Union No . 21, Interna- tional Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, is a labor organiza- tion within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. By picketing the stores of The Emporium , Mayfair, Big G, Cala, Longs, and Petrini's, as found herein, for an object of forcing or requiring said persons to cease doing business with I.J., Respondents have engaged in unfair labor prac- tices within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act. 4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. RECOMMENDED ORDER Uppon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Sec- tion 10(c) of the Act, I recommend that the Respondent San Francisco Typographical Union No. 21, International Ty- pographical Union, AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and rep- resentatives , shall: 1. Cease and desist from : Threatening, coercing or re- straining The Emporium-Ca well Corporation , Arden- Mayfair Incorporated, Big G Supermarkets , Inc., Cala Foods, Inc., Longs Drug Store, Incorporated, or Petrim's Meat Incorporated, or any other person engaged in com- merce or in an industry affecting commerce, where an ob- ject thereof is to force the above named persons, or any other person, to cease doing business with California News- papers, Inc., d/b/a San Raael Independent -Journal, under circumstances prohibited by Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action designed to effec- tuate the policies of the Act.: (a) Post at its business office and meetings halls in San Francisco and in Marin County, California, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 19 Copies of said notice on forms to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Region 20, shall, after being duly signed by an official repre- sentative of the Union, be posted by it immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it for 60 days thereafter in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to its members are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Union to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (b) Sign and mail to the Regional Director for the Region 20, sufficient copies of said Notice for posting by California Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a San Rafael Independent Journal, The Emporium-Capwell Corporation, Arden-Mayfair In- 19 In the event no exceptions are filed as provided by Section 102 46 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, the findings, conclusions, recommendations , and Recommended Order herein, shall, as provided in Section 102 48 of the Rules and Regulations , be adopted by the Board and become its findings , conclusions , and o-der, and all objections thereto shall be deemed waived for all purposes . In the event that the Board's Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order of the National Labor Rela- tions Board" shall be changed to read "Posted Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board." SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21 681 corporated, Big G Supermarkets, Inc., Cala Foods, Inc., Longs Drug Stores, Incorporated, and Petrini's Meat Incor- porated, at all locations where notices to the employees of each are customarily posted, if any of said employers are willing so to do. (c) Notify said Regional Director in writing, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this Decision, what steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith 20 It is further recommended that unless, on or before 20 days from the date of the receipt of this Decision, the Respondent shall notify said Regional Director, that it will cou.^ly with the foregoing Recommended Order, the National ,abor Rela- tions Board issue an order requiring Respondent to take the aforesaid action. The allegations relative to Lucky Stores, Inc., are dis- missed. The Emporium-Ca well Corporation, Arden-Mayfair Incorporated, Big G Supermarkets, Inc., Cala Foods, Inc., Longs Drug Stores, Incorporated, or Petrini's Meat Incorporated, or any other person engaged in commerce, where an object thereof is to force or re- quire the above-named persons, or any other person, to cease doing business with California Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a San Rafael Independent Journal. 20 In the event this Recommended Order be adopted by the Board, this provision shall be modified to read - "Notify said Regional Director, in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order what steps Respondent has taken to comply therewith." Dated By APPENDIX NOTICE To EMPLOYEES AND MEMBERS POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT in any manner prohibited by Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act, threaten, coerce, or restrain SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION No 21 INTERNATIONAL TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION , AFL-CIO (Labor Organization) (Representative) (Title) This is an official notice and must not be defaced by anyone. This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Any questions concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions, may be directed to the Board's Office, 13050 Federal Bldg., 450 Golden Gate Ave., Box 36047, San Fran- cisco, California, Telephone 415-556-0335.