Analysis of Stages of Disposition of Unfair Labor Practice Cases Closed, Fiscal Year 1956

p. 183. CROP: the table is cut off at the bottom of the image. The stage sequence stops at the "After Board decision, before court decree" block; later stages (e.g. after court decree) continue on the next page, and none of the footnote texts (markers 1-6 are used in the table) appear on this crop, so `footnotes` is empty. DECIMAL POINTS: in the percent columns the decimal point frequently failed to reproduce in this 1-bit scan, so cells print as "100 0", "89 5", "42 3", "2 6", "1 1" etc. I have restored the point ("100.0", "89.5", ...). The restoration is supported by column alignment (the lone digits sit in the tenths position) and by the leading dots that did survive in neighbouring cells (".8", ".7", ".5", ".3"). Values below 1 are printed in the original with a leading dot and no zero; I transcribed them that way (".4", ".6"), even where the dot itself is lost on the scan and only the tenths digit is visible. "(6)" CELLS: a parenthesized raised 6 standing alone as a value (a footnote reference, in these NLRB tables normally "less than 0.05 percent"). Transcribed literally as "(6)" since there is no number for the marker to attach to. FOOTNOTE MARKERS ON VALUES: raised 2 before 5,619 (All C cases, Number, total row) -> "5,619^2"; raised 3 before 15, raised 4 before 117, raised 5 before 17 (CD cases, Number, the Adjusted / Withdrawn / Dismissed rows under "Before issuance of complaint"). Raised 1 on the CA, CB, CC and CD panel headings. ARITHMETIC CHECK: every Number column was verified against its stage total and all agree (e.g. 562+2,379+2,065+24 = 5,030; 63+1+33+38+10 = 145; 12+2+10+5+3 = 32; 155+1+36+6 = 198, and likewise for CA, CB, CC, CD). This gives high confidence in the count columns. SUSPECTED MISPRINTS / DOUBTFUL PERCENT CELLS (all transcribed as printed, not corrected). Several percents do not match the printed counts by the usual rounding: - "Withdrawn" under "Before issuance of complaint", CB Percent: reads 39.3, but 490/1,245 = 39.4. - "Dismissed" under "Before issuance of complaint", CB Percent: reads 40.1 (40.08 rounds to 40.1, consistent). - "Adjusted" under "After issuance of complaint", CB Percent: reads 1.1, but 13/1,245 = 1.0. - "After hearing opened, before issuance of intermediate report", CB Percent: reads .7, but 8/1,245 = .6. - "After intermediate report, before issuance of Board decision", All C and CA Percent: both read .5, but 25/5,619 = .4 and 17/3,841 = .4. - "Compliance" under "After intermediate report", CA Percent: reads .5, but 16/3,841 = .4. - "After Board order adopting intermediate report in absence of exceptions", CA Percent: reads .6, but 21/3,841 = .5. - "Compliance" under "After Board order", CA Percent: reads .3, but 9/3,841 = .2. - "Adjusted" under "After hearing opened", CA Percent: reads .3, but 7/3,841 = .2. - "Compliance" under "After Board decision", CB Percent: reads 2.1, but 27/1,245 = 2.2. These are single tenths digits at small type size; each is either an original rounding inconsistency or a possible misread of the scan. ZERO CELLS: in the percent columns a zero is printed sometimes as "0" and sometimes as ".0", and at this scan quality the presence of the leading dot is not always certain. I followed what is visible; the cells I read as ".0" are: CC Percent for "Withdrawn" (after intermediate report), "After Board order adopting ... exceptions", "Withdrawn" and "Otherwise" (after Board decision); and CD Percent for "Compliance with stipulated decision" and "Compliance with consent decree" (after hearing opened) and "Withdrawn" (after Board decision). LABEL WRAPPING: "After Board order adopting intermediate report in absence of exceptions" is printed on two lines with an end-of-line hyphen in "excep-tions"; joined and the hyphen removed.

p. 184. Crop continues a table from the preceding page: no column headings are printed on this image, so header_rows is empty. The grid has 11 columns — the stub plus five number/percent pairs (columns 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, 10-11). Footnotes 1, 3, 4 and 5 are printed under this crop but their markers appear on earlier parts of the table, above this crop. Decimal points in the percent columns are frequently lost in this scan: values plainly meant as tenths print as bare digits ("6", "8", "5", "4", "1") and two-digit percents print with a gap where the point belongs ("2 2", "1 7", "2 6", "1 3", "1 0", "1 5", "2 0"). Because every percent cell in this table carries one decimal place, I restored the decimal point uniformly — so "2 2" is given as 2.2, a bare "1" as .1, and the zero percents as .0. Dots are visible in some of those cells (e.g. the ".0" in column 7 of the last row, ".8" in column 9 of the first two rows) and absent in neighbouring ones, which is scan dropout rather than a difference in the printing. If the original in fact prints a bare "0" in some percent cells, those cells would read 0 rather than .0. Doubtful cell: row "After circuit court decree, before Supreme Court action", column 7 (percent of the fourth number column). Only a single "1" is legible, which I transcribed as .1, but the three component rows below it read 2.6 + .4 + .1 = 3.1, and 39 cases against that column's base implies about 3.1 percent. A leading "3" has very likely been lost from the print or the scan in that cell; it is transcribed as it appears rather than corrected. The "(6)" cells hold a raised 6 inside parentheses (footnote 6, "Less than one-tenth of 1 percent"), written here as (^6). In the "Compliance" row under "After Supreme Court denied writ of certiorari" a raised 2 is printed before 31, transcribed as 31^2. Stray ink in the "Otherwise" row under "After circuit court decree" — a dot after the "(6)" in column 3 and a short dash between columns 3 and 4 — is scan noise, not printed content. Column sums of the number columns check out in every row (e.g. 121 = 77 + 39 + 5 + 0).