Athens Printing Pressmen, No. 269

154 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Athens Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 269, affiliated with the International Printing and Graphic Communications Union, AFL-CIO and Thompson Brush-Moore Newspapers, Inc. d/b/a The Portsmouth Times ' and Portsmouth Typographical Union No. 637, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO. Case 9-CD-304 January 15, 1975 DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE BY MEMBERS JENKINS, KENNEDY, AND PENELLO This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, follow- ing charges filed by Thompson Brush-Moore News- papers, Inc. d/b/a The Portsmouth Times, herein called the Employer, alleging that Athens Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 269, affiliated with the International Printing and Graphic Commu- nications Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Pressmen, violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. A duly scheduled hearing was held before Hearing Officer Eric D. Fields on September 5, 1974. 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.2 Thereaft- er, the Employer and the Pressmen filed briefs; no brief was filed by Portsmouth Typographical Union No. 637, International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Typographers. 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. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, including the aforementioned briefs, the Board makes the following findings: I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER The parties stipulated, and we find, that Thompson Brush-Moore Newspapers, Inc. d/b/a The Ports- mouth Times, is a Delaware corporation located in Portsmouth, Ohio, engaged in producing a daily newspaper which is distributed primarily in the local Portsmouth, Ohio, area. During the past 12 months, the Employer had a gross volume of business in ' At the hearing the Employer's name was corrected to delete the abbreviation "Inc." after "The Portsmouth Times." At various places in the record the first word in the Employer's name excess of $200,000, and it Purchased and causod to be shipped directly in interstate commerce from suppliers outside the State of Ohio goods valued in excess of $50,000. The Employer advertises national- ly sold products for national companies, such as Sears, Roebuck and Company, and subscribes to national wire services. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 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 A. Background and Facts of the Dispute As of the time of the hearing, the Employer employed 30 composing room employees who were represented by the Typographers, and 19 pressroom and stereotype employees represented by Respon- dent Pressmen. In June or July 1974, the Employer installed photocomposition equipment in preparation for converting from a hot metal type process to a coldtype process for producing newsprint, which it planned to begin on October 1, 1974. Under the Employer's hot metal system, editorial copy came to the composing room employees as typed pages or perforated tape from an Associated Press wire machine. If it was in written form, the first function of the composing room employees was to translate it into perforated tape for use on a TTS Linecaster which produced lines of type or slugs, and these were assembled by composing room employees in page form inside a metal frame, known as a chase. The chase was then transferred from the compos- ing room to the stereotype employees represented by Respondent Pressmen. It was placed on a mat roller, where it was planed, cleaned, and rolled under pressure to form an impression on a page mat. The page mat was transferred from the stereotype department to the pressroom, where it was visually inspected for imperfections and dried in a scorcher. After being trimmed and hardened, it was placed into a page-casting box, where molten lead was pumped in to form a molded page or stereoplate. The stereoplate was then trimmed and cooled and placed on a press cylinder ready for printing. Illustrative work was converted to an engraving form using a Fairchild Scan-A-Graver; the scan-a- graving was affixed to the stereoplate just prior to appears differently as "Thomson" and as "Thompson," but the correct spelling is not clearly specified. 2 The International Typographical Union intervened at the hearing. 216 NLRB No. 27 ATHENS PRINTING PRESSMEN, NO. 269 going to press. The Fairchild Scan-A-Graver was located in the newsroom and was operated by a member of a bargaining unit represented by the Typographers, distinct from the composing room employees. Under the new coldtype system a photographic composition process would replace the lead molding process. A Merigraph plastic platemaking system would be used instead of the stereoplatemaking process. As in the old process, news copy would be converted into perforated tape . All perforated tape would be fed into a new photocomposition machine, operated by composing room employees, which would produce a picture of a galley of type called a photocopy. The photocopy would be composed into an assembled page known as a pasteup. Under the new system, the pasteup would be delivered to the stereo-pressmen for conversion into a printing plate. The first step in the conversion would be the production of a negative by a Robertson 500 camera and associated darkroom equipment. Next the negative would be inspected and imperfections corrected . The negative would then be placed on the Merigraph plastic platemaking machine and covered by a plastic sheet on which a photosensitive emulsion would be deposited. The product would be exposed to ultraviolet rays, which harden the emulsion that would contain the final print. After washing and inspecting, the plate would be trimmed and mounted on a press cylinder, ready for printing. In the cold type process illustrative work would be incorporated directly onto the page pasteup without further processing. News photos would be directly mounted on the plastic plate and covered with a screen for printing. The Robertson 500 camera would also be used for photo reduction work. The Employer estimated that the conversion to the coldtype process would necessitate reducing by 2 the number of employees in the press-stereo department represented by Respondent Pressmen, and by ap- proximately 19 the number of composing room employees represented by the Typographers. The Employer planned to train all the employees repre- sented by Respondent in the photocomposition process so that they would operate under a single supervisor as dual-function employees performing camera work and platemaking, as well as manning the presses. By letter dated May 23, 1974, the Employer notified both the Pressmen and the Typographers of its intention to install the new coldtype process and to assign the related camera and platemaking work to employees represented by Respondent Pressmen. On June 12, 1974, the Typographers replied to the Employer's letter, claiming the camera work, the 155 related darkroom work, and the inspection and opaquing for the composing room unit and asserting that the Employer was obligated under the contract to bargain over the introduction of new machines or printing methods necessitating use of nonunit em- ployees. At a subsequent meeting on the question, a representative of the Typographers stated that the Employer's assignment of the disputed work to Respondent's unit did not preclude a jurisdictional strike by the Typographers . By letter dated July 17, 1974, Respondent Pressmen stated that, unless the disputed work was assigned to its unit pursuant to section 2 of its existing contract with the Employer, the Respondent would call a strike to ensure compliance therewith. B. The Work in Dispute The parties stipulated that the work in dispute is the operation of the Robertson 500 camera, the associated darkroom work (i.e., developing), and the inspection and correction of the negative, but excluding the actual process of plastic platemaking. C. Contentions of the Parties The Employer contended that its assignment of the disputed work to employees represented by Respon- dent Pressmen was based primarily on considera- tions of economy and efficiency. The Robertson 500 camera and Merigraph plastic platemaking machine have been located on the first floor adjacent to the pressroom for efficient flow of work. The Employer contended that since the Typographers did not claim the Merigraph platemaking work, it would be neither feasible nor efficient to have composing room employees, who are located on the second floor, performing camera work adjacent to and under common supervision with employees represented by the Pressmen and performing platemaking work on the first floor. The Employer contended its assign- ment would be necessary to allow the pressroom employees to maintain sole control over the quality of the plate. It is further claimed that assignment to the press-stereo group would utilize otherwise unpro- ductive time by making them multifunction employ- ees. The Employer noted that the press-stereo employ- ees have traditionally performed all work from platemaking to printing and contended that the disputed work is functionally a substitute for much of the initial rolling of the unprocessed mat per- formed by those employees. It was further contended that the Pressmen's contract covers the disputed work and supports the Employer's assignment. The pressmen concurred in the contentions of the 156 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Employer and stressed the functional equivalency of its present work and the work in dispute. The Typographers contended that the Employer was obligated to assign the disputed work to members of its unit under section 2a of the contract. It further contended that it would be no more difficult for the Employer to instruct and train its members than those of Respondent. D. Applicability of the Statute Section 10(k) of the Act empowers the Board to determine a dispute out of which an 8(b)(4XD) charge has arisen. However, before the Board proceeds with a determination of dispute, it must be satisfied that there is reasonable cause to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated. After becoming aware that the Typographers was claiming the work in dispute herein, Respondent Pressmen by letter dated July 17, 1974, informed the Employer that if the disputed work were not assigned to members of its unit, the Pressmen would call a strike to insure compliance with its view of its contract with the Employer. On the basis of the above-described threat, we find 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. E. Merits of the Dispute 1. The collective-bargaining agreements In pertinent part, the contract between the Em- ployer and the Pressmen in its jurisdictional clause provided: (1) It is understood that this contract applies to the union pressrooms operated by the Employer, and that the jurisdiction of this contract extends over all printing presses employed in said press- rooms, including but not limited to gravure, offset and letterpress printing presses and associated devices... . The collective-bargaining agreement between the Employer and the Typographers specifically exclud- ed the platemaking process from the jurisdiction of the composing room employees in the following language: "Jurisdiction of the Union begins with the markup of copy and continues until the material is ready for the printing press (but excludes the making of stereo- types and the Fairchild Scan-A-Graver) and the appropriate collective bargaining unit consists of all employees performing any such work." Neither contract specifically covered use of a device such as the Robertson 500 camera and related darkroom work. The Typographers contract specifi- cally excluded stereotype work and use of the Fairchild Scan-A-Graver. The disputed work is the functional equivalent of the stereotype work tradi- tionally performed by the pressmen and of the Scan- A-Graver work which is specifically excluded from the Typographers composing room contract and performed by a newsroom employee under a sepa- rate and distinct contract. We cannot find that the language of either contract standing alone favors the claim of either Union. However, when both contracts are considered in terms of substitution of functions within the present jurisdictional delineations , we find that assignment to the press-stereo employees is favored. 2. Area, craft, or industry practice The record contains no evidence advanced by the parties concerning controlling area or industry practice. Indeed, we find no indication that there exists any controlling area, craft, or industry practice that would favor assignment to either craft. 3. Job impact For the hot type process the Employer employed 30 composing room employees who are represented by the Typographers and 19 press-stereo employees who are represented by the Pressmen. The Employer estimated that conversion to the cold type process would necessitate elimination of 2 press -stereo jobs and 19 composing room jobs. The Employer contended that the sizeable reduc- tion in the number of composing room employees would not be substantially affected one way or another by the assignment of the disputed camera work and would be due almost entirely to the change from "hot" to "cold" type. We have, however, no evidence as to exactly how many composing room employees would have to be retained should they be assigned the camera work. The evidence shows that under the new process the press-stereo employees would have several periods of idle or down time during each day. Indeed, the Employer contended that the necessity to fill the idle time weighed heavily in its decision to assign the work to the press-stereo group. Although the Em- ployer contended that failure to assign the disputed work to the press-stereo employees would require further reduction of that department , we perceive no basis for such a finding in the absence of other evidence. Thus, upon the evidence presented, we are unable to find that the performance of the disputed work ATHENS PRINTING PRESSMEN, NO. 269 would have a significant job impact on either of the competing groups. Accordingly, we find this not to be a determinative factor. 4. Economy and efficiency The Employer and the Respondent Pressmen presented evidence showing that considerations of economy and efficiency favored assignment to the press-stereo group. Such assignment would allow these employees to fill otherwise idle time. The camera, its related facilities, and the Merigraph platemaking machine are located on the first floor adjacent to and under common supervision with employees performing platemaking work represented by the Respondent Pressmen. The employees represented by the Pressmen have traditionally been solely responsible for the quality of the plate and print. If they are to continue to be responsible for quality control it is preferable for them to perform all steps in the process including camera work. In the absence of any evidence that assignment to the composing room employees would be more, or even equally, economical and efficient as compared to assignment to the press-stereo employees, we find that this factor strongly favors assignment to the press-stereo group. - 5. Skill The Employer plans to use its own personnel and manufacturers' representatives to train employees represented by Respondent Pressmen. There is no evidence that either group already possesses skills that would facilitate their performance of the camera work. Therefore, we find that skill factors do not favor assignment to either craft. 6. Employer preference In May 1974, the Employer assigned the disputed 157 work to the press-stereo employees based on consid- erations of economy and efficiency. The record indicates that the Employer maintains a preference for this assignment. This is a factor which supports an award of the work to the employees represented by the Pressmen. 7. Conclusion Upon consideration of all pertinent factors, we shall assign the work in dispute to the employees represented by the Pressmen. The factors of employ- er preference, economy, and efficiency, and func- tional equivalency of the new work to previous functions are so favorable to that group as to be dispositive. In making this determination, we are assigning the disputed work to press-stereo employees employed by the Employer and represented by the Pressmen, but not to the Pressmen or its members. Our present determination is limited to the particular dispute which gave rise to this proceeding. 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: Employees employed by Thompson Brush-Moore Newspapers, Inc. d/b/a The Portsmouth Times, in its press-stereo department and currently represented by Athens Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 269, affiliated with the International Printing and Graphic Communications Union, AFL-CIO, are entitled to perform all work in connection with the Robertson 500 camera.