The Citizen-News Co.

In the Matter of THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY, A CORPORATION and Los ANGELES NEWSPAPER GIIILD Case No. C-947.-Decided March 926, 1940 Newspaper Publishing Indusity-Interference , Restraint, and Coercion: dis- paraging and criticising union, its policies , and activities ; criticism of use of outside negotiation ; attempt to induce groups of employees to enter into contracts ; criticism of use of outside negotiators and threat to reduce wages when such employees refused to sign contract ; threat to discharge employees if union with whom respondent was negotiating succeeded in its contract proposals-Collective Bargaining : charge of refusal to bargain in good faith dismissed where parties subsequently entered a satisfactory contract-Dis- crv4nination: discharge ; charges of, dismissed as to four employees. Mr. David Persinger, for the Board. Mr. Willis Sargent and Mr. Frank B. Belcher, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the respondent. Mr. Carey McWilliams, of Los Angeles, Calif., and 111r. A. J. .lsserman, of Newark, N. J., for the Guild. Mr. William T. Little, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon charges and amended charges duly filed by Los Angeles Newspaper Guild, herein called the Guild, the National Labor Rela- tions Board, herein called the Board, by the Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California), issued its com- plaint dated June 27, 1938, against The Citizen-News Company,i a corporation, Hollywood, California, herein called the respondent, alleging that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. A copy of the complaint and ,notice of hearing thereon was duly served upon the respondent and the Guild. IIn the complaint the respondent was denominated as Hollywood Citizen -News Com- pany, a corporation At the hearing the designation was specifically corrected to that appearing in the caption. 21 N. L. R. B., No. 110. 1112 THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1113 The complaint alleged, in substance, that the respondent (1) dis- criminatorily discharged and refused to reinstate Roger C. Johnson, Mellier G. Scott, Jr., Elizabeth Yeaman, Karl Schlichter, and Helen Blair Thurlby,2 and did thereby discourage membership in a labor organization; (2) refused to bargain collectively in good faith with the Guild, the collective bargaining agency designated by the majority of the employees in an appropriate unit; and (3) by the foregoing acts interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. The respondent, in its answer dated July 1, 1938, denied that it had engaged in or was engaging in the alleged unfair labor practices. Pursuant to notice duly served on the parties, a hearing was held at Los Angeles, California, on July 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 12, 1938, before George E. Kennedy, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board, the respondent, and the Guild were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi- dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. On motion of counsel for the Board, the complaint was dismissed without prejudice as to Helen Blair Thurlby. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on other motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. At the close of the hearing, counsel for the respondent made several motions to dismiss the complaint. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling on the several motions and denied them in his Intermediate Report. The-Board has reviewed the Trial Examiner's rulings and finds that no prejudicial errors were com- mitted. The rulings are hereby affirmed. On September 1, 1938, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate Report, copies of which were duly served upon the parties, in which he found that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, and recommended that the respondent cease and desist from such unfair labor practices, that it reinstate with back pay the four employees found to have been dis- criminatorily discharged, that it bargain in good faith with the Guild upon request, that it offer those employees who went on strike because of the respondent's failure to bargain collectively immediate and full reinstatement upon application, and that it take other affirmative action remedial of the unfair labor practices. On October 14 and 21, 1938, the Guild and the respondent filed their respective exceptions to the Intermediate Report. Pursuant to notice, a hearing for the purpose of oral argument was had before the Board 2 Incorrectly designated as Thurly in the complaint. 1114 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD at Washington, D. C., on October 5, 1939. The Guild appeared and was represented by counsel. At oral argument, upon the request of its counsel, the Guild was granted a week within which to file a motion to reopen the record for the purpose of receiving' further evidence. Thereafter the Guild requested and received an additional two weeks within which to file such motion. On November 13, 1939, counsel for the Guild notified the Board that it no longer desired to file such motion. The Board has considered the exceptions to the Intermediate Report and, in so far as they are inconsistent with the findings, con- clusions, and order set forth below, finds them to be without merit. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT The respondent is a California corporation, having its principal office and place of business in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California. The respondent owns, prints, and publishes the Hollywood Citizen- News, herein called the Citizen-News, and the Hollywood Advertiser. In addition, the respondent engages in job printing for commercial establishments and other newspapers. The average daily circulation of the Citizen-News is in excess of 26,000 copies, of which the out-of-State circulation amounts to 125 copies, or about one-half of 1 per cent. The respondent is a member of the Associated Press and subscribes to the services of the United Press, both of which maintain teletype machines at the respondent's plant. The Associated Press has the privilege of using items of news and intelligence collected and edited by the respondent's em- ployees. The items of news collected outside the State of California and transmitted to the respondent comprise approximately 21 per cent of the reading matter of the Citizen-News. The respondent subscribes to numerous syndicated services which supply materials originating outside the State of California amounting to about 17 per cent of the reading matter of the Citizen-News. The revenue derived from advertising originating outside the State amounts to approximately 10 per cent of the total advertising revenue of the Citizen-News, and more than 5 per cent of the respondent's total revenue. The respondent uses about 350 tons of newsprint per month, all of which is shipped to the respondent from British Columbia, Canada. The purchase of newsprint constitutes 20 per cent of the total expenses of all the respondent's publications and 10 per cent of the cost of publishing the Citizen-News. THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED 1115 Los Angeles Newspaper Guild, otherwise known as Chapter No. 69 of the American Newspaper Guild, is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization,3 herein called the C.'I. O. It admits to membership commercial, business, and editorial- department employees of newspapers in Los Angeles and adjacent counties. The Citizen-News unit of the Guild is a subdivision thereof admitting to membership employees of the respondent employed in the above-named departments. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. Interference, restraint, and coercion The record does not disclose the existence of any labor organization or concerted activity among the respondent's employees prior to July 1936. At that time a group of editorial employees petitioned Harlan G. Palmer, the respondent's president, for a pay increase. As a result individual conferences were arranged between Palmer and the individual employees, but the subject of wage increases was not discussed. Shortly thereafter, an item signed by Palmer appeared in the "Office Gossip," a mimeographed paper published by the re- spondent and distributed to the employees with their pay checks, requesting that employees submit grievances concerning salary and working conditions, and stating that if the grievances were dis- allowed and the employees were still dissatisfied, they should seek employment elsewhere. When Roger Johnson, an editorial employee, expressed his dissatisfaction with the results of the conferences to Harwood Young, the business manager of the Citizen-News, the latter stated that Palmer was adverse to acting under suggestions from "pressure groups." In September and October 1936 the Los Angeles Chapter of The American Newspaper Guild and the Citizen-News Chapter thereof were organized. At various times thereafter certain supervisory employees made disparaging remarks about the Guild. Thus Harold Swisher, Harwood Young, and Harold Wynn, who are respectively managing editor, business manager, and assistant business manager of the Citizen-NeN-,,s, commented unfavorably on the Guild's emphasis on "economics" rather than "ethics" in conversations with Roger Johnson and James Crow, editorial employees of the Citizen-News. Swisher, and at a later date, Harry Brandon, display advertising manager of the Citizen-News, criticized Guild settlements of strikes, the former saying that he did not see what had been achieved by the 3 Now the Congress of Industrial Organizations 1116 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD strikes and the latter, referring to a particular strike, stated that he would be ashamed to belong to an organization that was party to such a settlement. In June 1937 the American Newspaper Guild held a convention at which it voted, subject to a referendum, to join the C. I. O. and admit non-editorial employees to membership. About this time Swisher in speaking to Johnson questioned the advisability of the Guild's affiliating with the C. I. O. Some time later, in the fall of 1937, in connection with stories concerning strikes, he remarked to James Lindsey, Herman Reuters, and John Watts, editorial employees and Guild members who worked at the copy desk, that he believed in unions, but thought that the C. I. O. was carrying things too far. He inquired, "You fellows belong to the C. I. 0., don't you, the Guild?" On one occasion after the Guild convention, Young asked Johnson whether the Guild intended to organize the business department. At another time, the date of which does not appear in the record, he expressed the belief that the Guild should be limited to the editorial department. In like vein, Harry Brandon told Johnson that he dis- approved of unions for professional people. On one occasion the manager of the classified advertising department told Karl Schlichter that Palmer would never sign a union contract and that the editorial employees were making a mistake seeking higher wages. However, the burden of discouraging union activity among the employees of the business department seems to have been taken up by Brandon, the display advertising manager. In the course of his duties as display advertising manager, he held meetings of the advertising salesmen. He devoted several of these meetings exclusively to the topic of unions, speaking critically on the subject of unions in general and the Guild in particular. Specifically he complained that the Guild had changed the newspapermen's attitude, that they had lost interest in their work and only wanted to "put in eight hours, and watch the clock." On another occasion, he complained that the white- collar worker was caught between the business and laboring class and prophesied that some day the white-collar workers "are going to get ourselves some guns and go out and shoot those union bastards." In October 1937 Brandon applied for membership in the Guild and urged Johnson to secure his admission. The Guild refused to accept him as a member, fearing that his move was an attempt to dominate the Guild or at least the advertising salesmen in it. Shortly there- after, at a meeting of the salesmen, Brandon remarked, "you fellows have certainly tried to screw me up," and at another meeting a few clays later, he said : "you are thinking too much of unions and not doing your work." Late in October 1937, at another meeting at which he again discussed unions, Brandon again complained that the men THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1117 -,N ere not working hard enough and issued an order that they would have to work on Saturdays, despite the fact that there was little to be done in the department on that day. For a time thereafter the sales- men were required to work on Saturdays. When Johnson complained to Business Manager Young that the men felt that they were being discriminated against because of their Guild activity, the latter remarked that Brandon had a bad temper and had acted hastily and promised to speak to Brandon to see what could be done about the matter. Thus for a period of over a year, the respondent conducted a cim- paign of criticism and disparagement of the Guild. The purpose of the campaign is made all the more apparent by virtue of its relative intensity in the business department shortly before and after June 1937 when the Guild convention voted to extend its jurisdiction to employees of that department. In late June 1937, about the time of the Guild convention, at the request of the respondent, committees representing the various de- partments were formed by the employees and met with the respondent to discuss wages, working conditions, and grievances. At these meet- ings, the respondent proposed contracts to the various committees. The business department entered into a contract, through its commit- tee, but the editorial and the classified-advertising departments re- fused. When the editorial-department employees informed Palmer that they would not violate the Guild constitution and deal directly with him through a committee, Palmer asked, "Don't you know what you want? Can't you make up your own minds? Do you prefer to have someone in Washington or New York or some place dictate to you?" On several other occasions Young and Brandon also commented unfavorably on the Guild's practice of using outside negotiators. When the classified-advertising department employees, being desir- ous of acting through the Guild, refused to sign the contract offered by the respondent, Young informed them that their salaries would be the first to be reduced in the event that business decreased since the other departments would be protected under their contracts. While on one occasion this remark was made in answer to a question of the employees, on another occasion it was entirely gratuitous. Thus, while in 1936 the respondent discouraged collective activity, in 1937 after the appearance of the Guild it encouraged the forma- tion of bargaining committees and sought contractual relations with them. It is apparent that the respondent altered its policy of deal- ing with its employees in order to head off the organizational campaign of the Guild. 1118 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On December 15, 1937, the Guild and the respondent commenced a series of negotiations which continued over a period of 5 months. On May 13, 1938, the parties tentatively agreed upon a contract. On May 14 and 16 the respondent discharged five Guild members. A strike ensued and the negotiations terminated.' During the collective bargaining negotiations with the Guild, the respondent sought to discuss matters directly with the employees involved. Thus, the original contract proposed by the Guild pro- vided that no reporter should do photographic work. During the discussion of that provision at a meeting between Palmer and the negotiators, Selby Calkins, an employee who had previously been assigned to such tasks, and who was present as an observer, was called upon to express his opinion. He stated that he was desirous of performing only reportorial work. In discussing the matter, C. H. Garrigues, the executive secretary of the Guild, used the words "speed-up" and "stretch-out." The following day when Cal- kins was waiting to make a telephone call, Swisher, the managing editor, remarked that the "speed-up" and "stretch-out" did not appear to be disturbing him. A few moments later when Calkins passed his desk, Swisher said, "Jake, I don't understand you." Upon questioning by Calkins, he admitted that he had reference to Calkins' statement at the conference. Swisher thereupon sought to discuss other matters involved in the contract, but desisted promptly upon request. In similar vein, Swisher informed Alex- ander Swan, an editorial employee that if the Guild continued the contract negotiations, he would be negotiating himself out of a job inasmuch as retrenchment would be necessary if concessions were made to the Guild. Swisher also made a similar remark about Swan to Crow. On another occasion Young told Schlichter, a business- department employee who was subsequently discharged, that the progressive wage scale and severance pay provisions of the proposed contract would cause discharges and that Stanley Speer and one other employee would lose their jobs. The foregoing statements of supervisory employees were plainly calculated to destroy the prestige of the Guild and inculcate in the minds of the employees the fear that the efforts of their representatives would be profitless. We find that by the continuing expressions of criticism and dis- paragement of the Guild, the criticism of the use of outside negotia- tors, the attempt to secure contracts with employees' committees in the various departments, the threat to cut wages in the event that the classified-advertising employees failed to sign a contract, and the threat to discharge employees if a contract with the Guild was 4 The question of whether the discharges were discriminatory or whether the respe ad- ent's actions constituted a refusal to bargain in good faith is discussed below. THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1119 consummated, the respondent interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. B. The alleged refusal to bargain The complaint alleges in substance that the respondent failed to bargain in good faith with the Guild. Between December 22, 1937, when the parties held their first bargaining conference, and May 13, 1938, when they held their last, the respondent met with the Guild on at least nine occasions, agreed to many of the Guild's proposals, and submitted four counterproposals. On May 13, 1938, the parties agreed upon a contract subject to the approval of the Citizen-News unit of the Guild and the international union. The contract contained provisions for wages and hours, severance in- demnity, overtime, and other conditions of work; and appears to have been satisfactory to the Guild and the employees affected. On many occasions during negotiations Palmer indicated that the adoption of many of the Guild proposals would necessitate the dis- ,;harge of several employees. At the meeting of May 13, after all the terms of the contract had been agreed upon, Palmer informed the negotiators that he intended to discharge three employees and offered to furnish their names to the Guild. On May 14 and 16 Johnson, Scott, Yeaman, Thurlby, and Schlichter were discharged. On May 14, following the discharge of Johnson, Scott, and Yeaman, the Guild voted to strike. On May 17, upon the respondent's re- fusal to reinstate these employees, the Guild members went out on strike. At the' time of the hearing the strike was still in effect and the contract had not been ratified. During the oral argument before the Board, counsel for the Guild stated that "In July 1938, there was a strike settlement and the publishers signed the agreement . . . which had not been executed at the time the strike was called." We find below that the discharges did not constitute unfair labor practices. We do not find that the respondent failed to bargain in good faith with the Guild within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act. C. The discharges On May 14 and 16, the respondent discharged five employees. The complaint alleges that the employees were discriminatorily dis- charged because of union membership and activity. The respond- ent contends that its action was impelled by a decline in business which rendered a policy of retrenchment advisable. 'The respondent and the Guild bargained on behalf of the employees in the editorial department It was not disputed that during the negotiations the Guild represented a majority of the respondent's employees in this department 1120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Palmer testified that business started to decrease in August 1937, reached its low in December 1937, and continued at that level until the time of the discharges. In support of this statement, the respondent showed that the operations of the Citizen-News which had yielded a profit of $27,000 for the first 5 months of 1937, showed a loss of $1,800 for the same period of 1938. Display-advertising revenues of the respondent had fallen from $170,000 during the first 4 months of 1937 to $150,000 in the corresponding period of 1938. In short, according to Palmer, expenses increased and income de- creased. Thus early in the negotiations, Palmer informed the negotiators that a policy of retrenchment might become necessary because of economic conditions. Again, at the meeting of May 13, he informed the negotiators that he intended to discharge three employees and inquired if they wanted to know the names of the three. The negotiators replied in the negative saying that if the discharges were being made for the purposes of economy, they were not concerned. According to Palmer, he determined to effect the desired economies by reducing the amount of reading matter in the paper as well as the size of the staff. The amount of reading matter was reduced sometime in March or April. He testified that he decided to delay the staff reductions until a time when all other matters were agreed upon, in order that such discharges might not disturb the negotiations. Editorial Department. At the outset, it should be noted that all the employees in the respondent's editorial department were members of the Guild, and accordingly the fact that all the discharged em- ployees were members thereof is of little importance. Palmer testi- fied that his original plan was to reduce the editorial-department pay roll by $150, that he selected his assistant, Scott, and then determined that he could best spare one general reporter and one member of the drama department. For the reasons stated below, he determined to discharge Yeaman and Johnson. Mellier Scott, employed chiefly as an editorial writer and editor of the readers' letters column, worked directly under Palmer. He was not a particularly active Guild member. In March 1938, when he requested a leave of absence, Palmer informed him that although there was nothing to prevent it, he could not guarantee him or any- one else a job 2 months hence because of business conditions. Palmer testified that he decided to take over Scott's work himself, and thus 'riot unduly curtail the managing editor's staff. Elizabeth Yeaman was an active Guild member, having served as secretary-treasurer of the Citizen-News unit of the Guild. At the conference between Palmer and the editorial employees in June 1937, at which Palmer proposed a contract, she answered Palmer's query of whether they were not capable of bargaining for themselves with THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1121 the statement that newspapermen were not and never had been capa- ble of bargaining for themselves. A few days later her title of drama editor was taken from her and given to Crow. She admits, however, that Crow had theretofore been performing the editor's functions without the title. Upon her inquiring of Palmer whether or not he considered her demoted, a stormy session ensued in which Palmer cursed and swore at her and at the conclusion of which he informed her that if she should receive an offer of another position she should feel free to accept it. Thereafter Swisher urged Crow on several occasions to take over certain duties in connection with the drama department as his prerogative as editor. Palmer testified that, having determined to discharge one of the two drama-depart- ment employees, his choice lay between Crow, the president of the Citizen-News unit of the Guild, and Yeaman, its secretary-treasurer; that Crow was better at technical matters of make-up and caption writing, a fact admitted by Yeaman herself; and that Yeaman's, work as a columnist was to a certain extent paralleled by syndicated columns to which the respondent subscribed. Roger Johnson was perhaps the most active Guild member in the respondent's employ. He was one of the founders and had served as the first president of the Los Angeles Chapter of the American News- paper Guild, and at the time of his discharge was a vice president thereof. The management frequently spoke to him about matters concerning the Guild rather than to the officers of the local unit and many of the statements outlined in Section III A, above, were directed to Johnson. In the course of his employment Johnson wrote a great number of feature stories and also covered the meetings of various breakfast and luncheon clubs. When the respondent reduced Ole amount of reading matter, it considerably reduced the amount of feature stories and eliminated the coverage of several of the eating clubs. Palmer testified that having decided to discharge one of the three general reporters, his choice lay between Johnson, Simonton, and Calkins. Calkins was an active Guild member, having served as acting treasurer of the Citizen-News unit and as a member of one of the Guild negotiating committees. Simonton was a delegate to the local C.I.O. Unit Council. According to Palmer's uncontradicted testimony, Simonton was the best reporter of the group. He further testified that Calkins' ability as a photographer and his greater versa- tility made Johnson the logical choice for discharge. Although Calkins was not assigned to the duties of a relief photographer in the schedule of assignments that the respondent posted on May 14, the schedule was an informal one. Business Department. Palmer testified that, in accordance with his retrenchment policy, he requested Young to estimate the value of all the employees working in his department and recommend discharges- 1122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and that Young recommended the discharge of Thurlby and Schlich- ter. Since the Trial Examiner, on motion of counsel for the Board, dismissed the complaint as to Thurlby without prejudice, we are no longer concerned with her case. Karl Schlichter was engaged pri- marily in preparing statistics concerning the Hollywood market area. Palmer testified that in the past the respondent had operated without anyone performing Schlichter's function, that national ad- vertising, with which Schlichter's activities were primarily concerned, had decreased 40 per cent, and that it was accordingly a logical move to discharge him. There is no evidence that Schlichter was a par- ticularly active member of the Guild. Conclusions. Business conditions had long warranted a policy of retrenchment. Although the respondent delayed putting such policy into effect until the time the contract was submitted for ratification, it warned the employees of its intentions on several occasions prior thereto. Had it desired to disrupt and terminate negotiations as alleged in the complaint, we see no reason why the same discharges made during the course of the negotiations would not have been equally effective. The respondent's explanation that it delayed to avoid disrupting and terminating negotiations is reasonable. There is no evidence that the retrenchment was excessive, or that new em- ployees were hired to take the place of the discharged employees.6 The sole question remaining is whether the respondent discrim- inated in selecting the employees to be discharged in order to dis- courage union activity. In the editorial department, all employees were members of the Guild, and accordingly membership in the Guild, alone, is insufficient to show discrimination. No other rea- son is offered to substantiate the charge of discrimination in the case of Scott. Johnson and Yeaman were officers of the Guild and active therein. However, the respondent has given a reasonable explana- tion for its choice and the other employees whom the respondent would have been required to discharge as an alternative to the two selected were also active Guild members. The quarrel between Yea- man and Palmer, though acrimonious at the time, occurred about a year before the discharge. Although the Guild did not have unanimous membership in the business department of the Citizen- News, the choice of Schlichter, whose job was a newly created one and whose work was not immediately productive in a concrete way, was not an unreasonable move for an employer to make when faced with losses and the need for retrenchment. We find that the respondent has not discriminated in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of Roger C. Johnson, Mellier G. Scott, Jr., Elizabeth Yeaman, and Karl Schlichter to discourage membership in the Guild. The strike was still in progress at the time of the hearing. THE CITIZEN-NEWS COMPANY 1123 IV THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE We find that the activities of the respondent set forth in Section III A, above, occurring in connection with the operations of the respondent described in Section I above, have a close, intimate, and substantial 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 the respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor practices, we will order that it cease and desist from such prac- tices and, to effectuate the purposes of the Act, we will order the respondent to post notices stating that it will so cease and desist. The respondent's employees will thus be assured that they may exer- cise the rights guaranteed by the Act without fear of interference, restraint, or coercion. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Los Angeles Newspaper Guild is a labor organization, within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act. 2. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the re- spondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act. 3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor prac- tices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The respondent has not discriminated in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of Roger C. Johnson, Mellier J. Scott, Jr., Elizabeth Yeaman, and Karl Schlichter, and has not thereby dis- couraged membership in a labor organization, within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act. 5. The respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act. ORDER Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 'the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent, The Citizen-News Company, a corporation, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall : 1124 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 1. Cease and desist from in any manner interfering with, restrain- ing, or coercing its employees in the exercise of the right to self- organization , to form, join , or assist labor organizations , to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargain- ing and other mutual aid and protection , as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Immediately post notices in conspicuous places throughout its plant and maintain such notices for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, stating that the respondent will cease and desist in the manner aforesaid; (b) Notify the Regional Director for the Twenty -first Region in writing within ten (10 ) days from the date of this Order what steps the respondent has taken to comply herewith. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the allegations of the complaint charging the respondent with engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (3) and (5) of the Act be, and they hereby are, dismissed, but that such dismissal of the allegations which respect to violations of Section 8 (3) of the Act shall be without prejudice to any and all rights of Helen Blair Thurlby.