Analysis of Stages of Disposition of Unfair Labor Practice Cases Closed, Fiscal Year 1964

p. 191. 15 columns: stub + seven case types, each with a Number and a Percent column. Column heads: the 4th-6th case-type heads are printed with badly filled letterforms that read like "OO cases", "OD cases", "OE cases"; transcribed as "CC cases", "CD cases", "CE cases" following the standard NLRB C-case nomenclature (CA, CB, CC, CD, CE, CP) and the "All C cases" head. Decimal points: this is a coarse 1-bit scan and many decimal points in the Percent columns did not print (e.g. "100 0", "86 8", "37 6", "1 5", and bare "5", "3", "2", "8", "9" where a leading point is meant). They are transcribed with the point restored (100.0, 86.8, 37.6, 1.5, .5, .3, .2, .8, .9). The restoration is corroborated arithmetically: in every section the restored sub-row percents sum exactly to the printed section percent (e.g. All C 4.2+.1+.6+.7+.2 = 5.8; CE 14.3+34.7+22.5 = 71.5; CC .8+.7 = 1.5), and the sub-row counts sum to the section counts in every column. Where a Percent cell shows a bare "0" with no visible point it is left as "0"; elsewhere ".0" is clearly printed. The 0 / .0 distinction is the least certain part of the grid, though it carries no numeric difference. "(3)" appearing in a Percent cell is a printed footnote reference used in place of a value (conventionally "less than 0.05 percent"); transcribed as printed. The marker on the CD figure in "Before issuance of complaint" is a raised 2 set to the left of the number, transcribed as 317^2. Blank/dash cells: under "Before issuance of complaint", the CD Number and Percent cells of Adjusted, Withdrawn and Dismissed hold dash rules; in the "10(k) actions" row the CE and CP cells hold dash rules and the CA, CB and CC cells are blank. All given as "". A short stray dash is printed immediately left of "252" in the CC Number column of the Dismissed row (under "Before issuance of complaint"); read as 252, which is what the column sum requires. Footnote texts are not printed inside this crop — markers 1 (caption), 2 and (3) are used but their definitions fall below the crop, so the footnotes list is empty. The table does not finish on this page: the stages shown sum to 14,249 of the 15,074 All C cases closed (and 42 of the 49 CE cases), so further stage rows continue past the bottom rule of this crop.

p. 192. CROP / STRUCTURE. This is a continuation page: no column headings are printed on the image, so header_rows is empty. The grid has 15 columns: the stub plus 14 numeric columns separated by column rules. The numeric columns run as seven Number/Percent pairs (col 1-2 a total, then cols 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-12, 13-14 for six case types — on the parent table these are the all-C total and CA, CB, CC, CD, CE, CP, but none of those headings appear on this crop, so I have not supplied them). The pairing is confirmed by arithmetic: in every row the six type counts sum to the col-1 total (e.g. 316+74+24+7+2+13 = 436), and in each group the indented rows sum to the stage line (297+6+130+3 = 436; 249+90 = 339; 45+5 = 50). DECIMAL POINTS. Every cell in the seven percent columns is printed with a decimal point, but the period is only intermittently legible in this 1-bit scan; most percent cells render as two digits separated by a gap ("2 9", "1 5", "10 2") where the period sits, and the period is plainly visible in only a few cells ("3.1", ".0", ".2", ".3"). I have restored the point in every percent cell (so "2 9" is transcribed "2.9" and a bare "9" in a percent column is transcribed ".9"). All eleven rows then reconcile exactly as decimals (2.0 + negligible + .9 + negligible = 2.9; 1.6 + .6 = 2.2; 2.1 + .0 + 10.2 + ... etc.), which is why I am confident the points are printed rather than inferred. The same loss affects zero percents: some render as ".0" and some as a bare "0" in otherwise identical positions (e.g. the "Otherwise" row shows a visible ".0" under CD and CE but a bare "0" under CB, CC and CP), so I have written ".0" uniformly. If a strictly literal reading is wanted, the zero-percent cells are the ones to re-check at higher resolution. FOOTNOTE-MARKER CELLS. Six percent cells hold a parenthesised raised 3 standing in place of a value (footnote 3, "Less than one-tenth of 1 percent"): rows "Withdrawn" and "Otherwise" in the total column, "Otherwise" in the CA column, and the last "Dismissed" row in the total and CA columns. I have encoded these as "(^3)" to keep both the printed parentheses and the raised digit. In the last "Compliance" row the ".3" and ".4" sit at that row's baseline while the "(^3)" marks below them belong to the "Dismissed" row; the two are close together and slightly offset in the print, but the arithmetic (45+5 = 50, 41+1 = 42) confirms the assignment as transcribed. DOUBTFUL CELLS. (a) CE percent column (col 12): the stage line "After circuit court decree, before Supreme Court action" and its "Compliance" row both read "10.2", while the first stage line reads "4.0" and its "Compliance"/"Dismissed" rows read "2.0". These imply mutually inconsistent CE denominators (10.2% of a count of 5 implies about 49 CE cases; 4.0% of 2 and 2.0% of 1 imply about 50). Either "10.2" is really "10.0" or "4.0" is really "4.1"; I transcribed what I read, but this is the weakest cell group on the page. (b) "After Supreme Court action", CC percent (col 8): I read ".2", and its two component rows both read ".1", which sums correctly; however the counts (3 = 1 + 2) against the implied CC denominator would give .1 + .2 = .3. One of these three cells is probably a tenth off, in the print or in my reading. (c) "Dismissed" (last row), CB percent, read as ".1": the implied value is below one-tenth of 1 percent, where the table elsewhere uses the "(^3)" marker, so a "(^3)" there cannot be ruled out, though the column sum favours ".1". MINOR. A small stray mark precedes "Compliance" in the second-to-last row (it reads like a raised dot or short dash); it is not a footnote marker and not part of the label, so I have transcribed the label as "Compliance". Footnote 1 appears to end without a terminal period ("...definition of terms"); transcribed as seen. Leader dots after the row labels have been dropped, and the double rules separating the three stage groups carry no values.