Chicago Local 245, Graphic Arts International Union

160 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Chicago Local 245, Graphic Arts International Union, AIFL-CIO' and The Post Tribune, a Division of Northwest Publications, Inc. and Chicago Stereoty- pers Union No. 4, AFL-CIO. Case 13-CD-244 March 28, 1975 DECISION-AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE BY MEMBERS JENKINS , KENNEDY, AND PENELLO This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, as amended, following charges filed by The Post Tribune, a Division of North- west Publications, Inc., herein called the Employer, alleging that Chicago Local 245, Graphic Arts Interna- tional Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Photoengrav- ers, has violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act by en- gaging in certain proscribed activities with an object of forcing or requiring the Employer to maintain its as- signnnent of certain work to employees represented by Photoengravers rather than to employees represented by Chicago Stereotypers Union No. 4, AFL-CIO, herein called Stereotypers. A duly scheduled hearing was held before Hearing Officer James M. McAuliff on December 16 and 17, 1974.2 All parties appeared and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and adduce evidence bearing on the issues. Thereafter, the Employer, the Photoengravers, and the Stereotypers filed briefs. 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 au- thority 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, the Board makes the following findings: I THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER The Post Tribune, A Division of Northwest Publica- tions, Inc., is a Delaware corporation engaged in the publication of a daily newspaper in Gary, Indiana. During the past calendar or fiscal year, the Employer had a gross volume of business in excess of $200,000, and it purchased and received from suppliers outside the State of Indiana goods valued in excess of $50,000. The Employer also carries local and national advertis- ing, subscribes to interstate news services, and pub- lishes nationally syndicated features. Accordingly, we find, as the parties have stipulated, that the Employer 1 The names of the parties appear as amended at the hearing 2 All dates hereafter are in 1974 unless otherwise stated. is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. II THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS The parties stipulated, and we find, that the Photo- engravers and the Stereotypers are labor organizations within the meaning of the Act. III. THE DISPUTE A. Background and Facts of the Dispute Traditionally the Employer has used hot and cold- type processes to print its newspapers, with the cold- type processes predominating and expected to supplant the hot-type processes completely by March 1975. In- volved herein is the switchover by the Employer from one cold-type process to another. Under the traditional cold-type process, composing room employees, by a technique referred to as "photo- composition," produce a body of reading matter on paper, which is then pasted into position on a larger flat piece of paper in the desired format. In the photoen- graving department the pasted-up page, after being checked for size and appropriateness for reproduction by the photoengraving process, is placed on a copy board in front of a large camera and reproduced on film. After the negative is developed and inspected it goes in a vacuum frame where it is placed on a photo- sensitive plate made of zinc or magnesium. Using a very high intensity light, the image from the negative is transferred onto the photosensitive material. The plate is then subjected to an "etching" stage, which removes the plate surface in the soft nonimage areas, leaving the reading matter and other image material in relief form on the plate surface. The plate must be examined to determine dot structure and depth of the etch. Finally, the plate is proofed and cut to proper size. The product of this process is a thin, lightweight, flexible plate carrying the image material in relief form, capable of being used as a printing plate, and ready for mounting on a press. However, because of cost of pro- duction and limited speed of production of the equip- ment heretofore employed for this process, direct print- ing use of these photoengraving plates has not been economically feasible. Instead, the Employer has operated an additional department to create duplicate plates by the technique known as stereotyping. The completed plate is trans- ferred to the composing room for inclusion in a page form or chase. The composing room sends it over to the stereotyping department. Stereotypers first transfer the copy from the mag- nesium plate to a moist papier mache mat by placing 217 NLRB No. 31 CHICAGO LOCAL 245, GRAPHIC ARTS INTERNATIONAL UNION the matrix against the plate and subjecting it to the proper amount of pressure using a mat roller. The ma- trix is then removed, trimmed, and formed. It is put in a scorcher where it is dried. The relief matrix is then placed in a casting box where molten lead is poured against it, thus producing, after cooling and hardening, a semicylindrical lead plate containing a raised image of what is to be printed. The plate is milled and cooled, and then sent to the pressroom where it is mounted on the press. The Employer contemplates that the speed of the Merigraph platemaking system will allow it to meet its press needs for a sufficient number of thin, flexible relief plates without the necessity for producing dupli- cates of the plates in the stereotyping department. Un- der the Merigraph system, the production stages from the original pasteup copy delivered by the composing room through the camera, film developing, and han- dling will remain unchanged and will use the same equipment in the same location. The Merigraph system continues to utilize the technique of a plate material, coated with a light-sensitive surface, with the film placed between that surface and a light source. How- ever, the plate material in this process is a liquid photopolymer resin rather than magnesium. In addi- tion, the nuArc Printer, the plate processor, the etcher and its control panel, and certain other associated equipment presently used will be removed from the photoengraving department and be replaced by two Merigraph 200 exposure units and companion Meri- graph developing units. In the Merigraph process, the image is transferred to the surface of the plate by the same technique of hard- ening of the areas as a result of the passage of the light through the clear portions of the negative, while the nonimage portions of the plate surface remain soft as a result of the blocking of the light by the dark, nonim- age portions of the negative. The unwanted back- ground material continues to be removed by a subtrac- tive process, in this case using detergent and water followed by an airstream in a "washout unit," as distin- guished from a nitric acid solution in the case of mag- nesium. The inspection process as performed on a Merigraph plate is exactly the same as the inspection process per- formed by photoengravers on a finished magnesium plate. Factors such as relief depth, shoulder configura- tion dot structure, serif configuration, and other mat- ters are checked, and the skills involved in checking a finished Merigraph plate are the same as the skills -nec- essary to inspect a finished magnesium plate. The sig- nificant difference will be that the finished plates are completed at a rate sufficiently fast to permit the pro- duction of enough plates to meet the Employer's press needs so that duplication by the stereotyping process 161 will no longer be needed. It is expected that there will be a transition period when some of the plates produced on the Merigraph equipment will be used as "pattern" plates and will go on through the stereotype process, as in the past, while others will be used as direct printing plates. The Merigraph system itself would operate at a sub- stantial pace only for about 2 hours per day. When the persons operating the Merigraph process are not oc- cupied on this process, the Employer intends to place them in other parts of the photoengraving operation. B. The Work in Dispute The work in dispute involves the operation of a new machine and printing process known as the Merigraph Photo-Relief plate system. C. Contentions of the Parties The Employer and the Photoengravers contend that the Employer's assignment of the disputed work to employees represented by Photoengravers should be upheld. In this regard they rely on the following fac- tors: the Board's certification of the Photoengravers, the contract between the Employer and the Photoen- gravers, industry and area practice, relative skills, economy of operations, job impact, and employer pref- erence. The Stereotypers contends that the work should be assigned to employees it represents based on the follow- ing factors: the contract between the Employer and the Stereotypers, the Board's limited certification of the Photoengravers, and job impact. D. Applicability of the Statute Before the Board may proceed to the determination of a dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, it must be satisfied that: (1) the parties have not agreed upon a method for the voluntary adjustment of the dispute, and (2) there is reasonable cause to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated. As to (1) above, the parties stipulated at the hearing, and we find, that there is no agreed-upon method of voluntary adjustment of the dispute which would be binding on all the parties. As to (2) above, the Employer assigned the work to employees represented by Photoengravers on Novem- ber 13, and notified the Stereotypers that stereotypers' work would be eliminated by the new process. On November, 22, the Stereotypers claimed the disputed work and invoked the grievance procedure of its con- tract with the Employer. On December 9, the Photoen- gravers notified the Employer that it claimed the work under its contract with the Employer and threatened 162 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD "all appropriate-action necessary, including strike ac- tion," should the work be assigned in any manner in- consistent with its claim. We find on these facts that reasonable cause exists to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act has been violated. Accordingly, we find that the dispute is properly before the Board for determination under Section 10(k) of the Act. E. Merits of the Dispute 1. Area or industry practice Testimony was adduced by the Employer and the Photoengravers to the effect that predominant industry and area practice was to assign the Merigraph process to photoengravers in situations where stereotypers were employed, with the exception of situations where photoengravers were merged with stereotypers into a new unit entirely. Stereotypers cited only one-instance where such operations had been assigned to their mem- bers but acknowledged that the plant in question had no photoengravers. In these circumstances, we find that this factor fa- vors the Photoengravers. 2. Economy and efficiency of operations Under the Employer's existing assignment, photoen- gravers who are performing the Merigraph process, which only occupies about 2 hours a day, are also available to perform other assignments in the photoen- graving department, such as the photographic, film developing, and film correction operations. On the other hand, it would appear that the Employer would lose this flexibility of moving employees back and forth between and among the various functions of the entire photoengraving department if the disputed work were assigned to stereotypers. Stereotypers admittedly do not have experience with negatives, exposure time, or any other photo or chemical process and do not require photographic skills in their work as stereotypers. Thus, if the Merigraph platemaking work is assigned to them they will be idle during the balance of their working day, since the introduction of the Merigraph process will totally eliminate the existing work in the stereoty- ping department. Accordingly, inasmuch as the assignment of the Merigraph process work to photoengravers contributes to the effective utilization of those employees and the efficient operation of the Employer's business, we find that this factor favors an assignment to photoengrav- ers. 3. Skill Although Stereotypers claims that its. people can be trained to operate the Merigraph equipment satisfac- torily, the record makes it clear that the skills and experience of photoengravers are more adaptable to the efficient operations of the Merigraph equipment. Un- like photoengravers, stereotypers have had no experi- ence with negatives, exposure time, or, for that matter, anything else related to photography. Photoengravers through experience and training possess better creden- tials to assess the quality of the plate as it progresses through the various stages of development, and to be able to diagnose what should be done about any defects that may appear or problems that may arise. Accordingly, we find this factor favors assignment of the work in dispute to employees represented by Photo- engravers. 4. Job impact If the disputed work is awarded to photoengravers, the result will be that there will no longer be any stereo- typers employed by the Employer. Such would consti- tute a loss of nine jobs. If the work is awarded to stereotypers, five stereotypers would be retained and five photoengravers would be retained. The resulting jobs lost to each of the crafts would be four stereotyping jobs and three photoengraving jobs. It is clear here that no matter which group of em- ployees receives the work, the other group will suffer a loss of employment. Nevertheless, we find that, in absolute number of jobs lost and impact on the con- tinuity of the craft, employees employed as stereotypers will suffer more in the way of job loss than will those employed as photoengravers. We further find that job impact adversity would be more equally shared among the competing groups if the work were awarded to stereotypers inasmuch as in that case both of them would suffer an approximate 50-percent loss in jobs. Although we recognize that the individual photoen- gravers losing jobs because of the absence of such favor- able softening provisions as those provided in the Stereotypers contract, we find this factor insufficient to offset the quantitatively larger impact on jobs and unit that the stereotypers would suffer. Accordingly, for the above reasons, we conclude that job impact would appear to favor an award of the work to stereotypers. 5. Certification and collective-bargaining agreements Pursuant to an election conducted March 22, 1960, in Case 13-RC-7023, the Photoengravers was certified as the collective-bargaining representative of all em- CHICAGO LOCAL 245, GRAPHIC ARTS INTERNATIONAL UNION ployees in the photoengraving department of the Em- ployer . . . who are engaged in producing photo- engraved plates from any copy furnished by the Employer to the Photo-engraving Department, or who are engaged in any of the processes pertaining to the production of photoengraved plates after the copy is furnished to the Department including photography and the processing of all negatives and positives for plate-making purposes, the mak- ing of masks for color separations, for plate-mak- ing purposes, drop out on plates or negatives, and retouching, color-scanning, stripping, painting, etching, finishing, engraving, tint-laying, routing, blocking and proofing, and including also the op- eration of such electronic plate-making devices and machines as the Fairchild Scan-A-Graver and Scan-A-Sizer and the Klischograph, all in connec- tion with and limited to the production of photo- engraved plates in the Employer's Photo-Engrav- ing Department. Since July 4, 1960, the date of the initial collective- bargaining agreement between the Employer and the Photoengravers, through the present agreement, the Photoengravers contracts have provided for jurisdic- tion over: The process of photoengraving and its attendant work thereto is defined as being and is all opera- tions of the process pertaining to the production of photoengraving plates, plates for offset, plates for gravure and gravure cylinders and plates of any substance or material from copy or originals and- /or subjects when furnished in lieu of copy up to the finished product. * * * Should the Company install any equipment or adopt any work processes designed as a substitute for, or evolution of, work now being done by photoengravers, the Company agrees to recognize the jurisdiction of the GAIU over such equipment and work processes. The contract of the Stereotypers with the Employer provides that: It is mutually agreed that all processes of offset plate-making, photo-polymer and all other forms of photosensitive platemaking shall be within the 163 jurisdiction of the Chicago Stereotypers' Union No. 4. The processes as mentioned above shall include all operations relative to the manufacture of offset plates, including camera, stripping, opa- quers and pre-sensitized platemakers as known to the offset process as well as all other operations necessary for the preparation of offset printing plates, including preparation of the finished plates for press, E.G. curving, crimping or treating of all plates for direct or offset printing. Should the Employer install any equipment or adopt any processes designed as a substitute for, or evolution of, work now being- done by Stereoty- pers, the Employer recognizes the jurisdiction of the Chicago Stereotypers' Union No . 4 over such equipment and process and shall make no other agreement covering such work. We find that the jurisdictional clauses of both con- tracts on their face appear to preserve the traditional work performed by the employees represented by the disputing labor organizations in their respective depart- ments, and arguably, cover the disputed work. We fur- ther find that neither of the contracts expressly covers the work in dispute herein , the operation of the Meri- graph Photo-Relief plate system. Therefore we cannot, and do not, accord controlling weight to either of the collective-bargaining agreements in making our deter- mination. Conclusion Upon the record as a whole, and after full considera- tion of all relevant factors involved, we conclude that the Employer's employees who are represented by the Photoengravers are entitled to perform the work in dispute. Although we have found that job impact would tend to favor stereotypers, we do not find that factor alone sufficient to outweigh those factors which we have found favor assignment of the disputed work to employees represented by the Photoengravers, in- cluding the Employer's assignment and preference; the area and industry practice , efficiency and economy of operations, and relative skills. Accordingly, we shall determine the dispute before us by awarding the dis- puted work at the Employer's newspaper in Gary, In- diana, to the Employer's employees represented by the Photoengravers, but not to that Union or its members. Our present determination is limited to the particular controversy which gave rise to this proceeding. 164 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor Re- lations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the foregoing findings and the entire record in this proceed- ing, the National Labor Relations Board hereby makes the following Determination of Dispute: Employees of The Post Tribune, a Division of North- west Publications , Inc., Gary, Indiana, who are repre- sented by Chicago Local 245, Graphic Arts Interna- tional Union, AFL-CIO, are entitled to perform the operation of a new machine and printing process known as the Merigraph Photo-Relief plate system.