NLRB Stats Archive › Annual Reports › FY1939 › Analysis of charges pending as of June 30, 1938

Analysis of charges pending as of June 30, 1938

printed as Table 5 · source page 37 · nlrb1939_p0037_t0

	Number of unfair labor practice cases pending June 30, 1938	Number of charges involving subsections of section 8					Number of charges by subsections of section 8 involved
	Number of unfair labor practice cases pending June 30, 1938	1	2	3	4	5	1 and 3	1 and 5	1, 3, and 5	1, 2, and 3	1, 2, 3, and 5	1	1 and 2	1 and 4	1, 2, and 5	1, 3, and 4	1, 4, and 5	1, 2, and 4	1, 2, 3, and 4	1, 3, 4, and 5	1,2,3,4, and 5
Board	6	6	5	6		2	1			3	2
Region:
1. Boston	109	109	35	71		42	39	18	12	13	7	5	10		5
2. New York	332	332	89	263	8	144	123	31	78	36	19	4	19	1	14	4			1	2
3. Buffalo	54	54	21	37	1	26	14	5	11	5	6	2	6		4	1
4. Philadelphia	148	148	63	106	2	52	52	15	14	24	14	4	15		8				1		1
5. Baltimore	166	166	37	125	1	49	73	17	28	20	3	10	13		1	1
6. Pittsburgh	57	57	26	46		14	24	1	4	10	8	2	7		1
7. Detroit	94	94	40	66	1	31	30	12	9	18	8	3	11		2				1
8. Cleveland	83	83	27	68	3	27	38	6	10	8	9	1	8			1					2
9. Cincinnati	165	165	29	111	3	77	63	43	23	13	9	5	4		2	2			1
10. Atlanta	119	119	28	104	6	38	52	8	21	17	9	5	1	1		4			1
11. Indianapolis	115	115	57	87	2	50	29	14	13	29	14	2	3		9				2
12. Milwaukee	93	93	34	61		34	31	8	8	11	11	12	5		7
13. Chicago	154	154	58	115	8	57	49	15	22	22	15	3	15	1	5	6			1
14. St. Louis	48	48	19	42	1	28	10	5	13	9	9				1	1
15. New Orleans	101	101	12	62	2	53	33	33	18	7	2	3	3			2
16. Fort Worth	81	81	32	58	7	30	27	4	12	6	7	1	12		5	4	1		1		1
17. Kansas City	102	102	36	86	1	40	32	13	20	27	6		2		1	1
18. Minneapolis	48	48	15	32	2	20	14	10	7	7	2		5		1	2
19. Seattle	114	114	20	93	2	49	50	13	28	8	5	1	5		2	1				1
20. San Francisco	122	122	18	98	1	73	28	13	57	11	2	6	3		1			1
21. Los Angeles	137	137	29	86	1	67	43	34	22	11	9	8	7		2	1
22. Denver	66	66	25	36	2	29	20	14	4	6	4	2	8		6	1					1
Total	2,514	2,514	755	1,859	54	1,032	875	332	434	321	180	79	162	3	77	32	1	1	9	3	5

Download this table (CSV)

1 Cases in which the Board assumed original jurisdiction.

361 of 361 figures sit in a row or column sum that works out.

Reader’s notes

p. 37. Grid is 22 columns: stub, "Number of unfair labor practice cases pending June 30, 1938" (a tall single heading, repeated in both heading levels), 5 columns under "Number of charges involving subsections of section 8", and 15 columns under "Number of charges by subsections of section 8 involved". No stub heading is printed, so cell 0 of both heading rows is empty. The last spanner column is printed tightly as "1,2,3,4, and 5" and is transcribed that way. Cells printed as a dash rule are transcribed as "". Column placement in the wide right-hand block was the main difficulty: most entries there are isolated one- or two-digit figures separated by long dash rules, and the printed columns are narrow. Every placement was cross-checked against (a) the row's own subsection counts in the "1"-"5" columns, since each combination column contributes to exactly the subsections it names, and (b) the printed column totals. All 21 column totals reproduce exactly as printed with the grid above, and every row's combination cells sum to that row's pending-case figure, so the transcription is internally consistent. Placements resolved this way (where my direct read of the column was uncertain): Cleveland has "1, 3, and 4" = 1 and "1,2,3,4, and 5" = 2 with "1, 2, and 5" empty; Atlanta has "1, 3, and 4" = 4 with "1, 2, and 5" empty; New Orleans has "1, 3, and 4" = 2 with "1, 2, and 5" empty; New York has "1, 2, 3, and 4" = 1 and "1, 3, 4, and 5" = 2 with the last column empty; Philadelphia has "1, 2, 3, and 4" = 1 and "1,2,3,4, and 5" = 1; Denver has "1, 3, and 4" = 1 and "1,2,3,4, and 5" = 1; San Francisco has "1, 2, and 4" = 1 (the only entry in that column). Doubtful digit: row "20. San Francisco", column "1, 2, 3, and 5". The glyph is small and could be read as 5 or as 2; it is transcribed as 2 because the printed column total (180) and that row's own subsection-2, -3 and -5 counts (18, 98, 73) all require 2, and 5 makes the row exceed its 122 pending cases. This is the one cell where the digit itself, not merely its column, was in doubt. No misprints were detected; all printed totals agree with the body as transcribed.

Source image

Source page 37 of NLRB FY1939 annual report — Source: NLRB Annual Report FY1939, p. 37.

Source data: U.S. NLRB Annual Reports (public domain). Reconstruction by NLRB Stats Archive. Read by claude-opus-5 (effort max, prompt extract_v1) from the 300-dpi scan; stitched by page. Updated October 2026.