Analysis of Method of Disposition of Unfair Labor Practice Cases Closed, Fiscal Year 1965

p. 201. 16 columns: stub + All C cases (Number, Percent of total closed, Percent of total method) + Number/Percent-of-total-closed pairs for CA, CB, CC, CD, CE and CP cases. Decimal points: the scan reproduces most decimal points in the percent columns only as a faint gap (e.g. "100 0", "25 1", "37 2", and bare "7"/"8"/"6"/"2" for values below 1). These are printed periods that did not survive the 1-bit scan, so they are transcribed as decimal points (100.0, 25.1, 37.2, .7, .8, .6, .2). Where a flat "0" is printed with no point (CB column on "Stipulated decision", "Consent decree", "After hearing opened", "Adopting trial examiner's decision") it is kept as "0"; the All C cells on the second "Stipulated decision" row are printed ".0" with a visible point. "Before issuance of complaint", CD cases Number column: the cell holds a parenthesized superscript footnote reference, "(2)", in place of a figure, and the adjoining CD percent cell is a dash rule (transcribed ""). Column sums confirm the implied value is 0 (1,960+354+381+0+17+96 = 2,808). Cells shown as "" are printed as a dash rule or are blank. Crop: the table is cut off after the "Withdrawal" row — later method rows (and any footnote block, including the texts for the caption's marker 1 and for marker 2) are not on this image, so `footnotes` is empty. Internal consistency: every column total and subtotal of the numbers checks out exactly. A few printed percentages differ by one tenth from a recomputation and are transcribed as printed: "Percent of total method" 3.5 for 125 of 3,629 (=3.44) and 38.1/2.3 for 342; "Percent of total closed" .7 for 115 of 15,219 (=.76); CA .8 for 76 of 10,360 (=.73); CD 1.4 for 6 of 465 (=1.29). The most doubtful reading is that 3.5 (row "After issuance of complaint; before opening of hearing", All C "Percent of total method"), where a printed "3.4" is conceivable, although 3.5 + .8 = 4.3 agrees with the Formal settlement line. Row-label wording is kept as printed, including the semicolon in "After issuance of complaint; before opening of hearing" (the parallel informal-settlement row uses a comma) and the bare "Compliance with" heading line.

p. 202. CROP: This is a continuation page. No column headings are printed on it, so header_rows is empty. The first five rows (Before issuance of complaint ... After Board or court decision) are the tail of a section whose heading/total line falls on the previous page. The grid has 16 columns: stub plus 15 data columns, which run as alternating count/percent pairs except that column 3 is a second percent column (percent within the section: the Dismissal block's column-3 values 92.2+.4+0+.2+5.7+1.3+.2 sum to the 100.0 printed on the Dismissal line). DECIMAL POINTS: This is a low-resolution bitonal scan and many printed decimal points have dropped out, leaving a gap (e.g. "36 4", "96 3", "1 8") or a bare digit in a percent column (e.g. "6" where .6 belongs). I have restored the decimal point wherever the column is a percent column and the arithmetic confirms it; every restoration was checked against a column sum or a subtotal. Verified checks: col 2 under Dismissal 27.7+.1+.0+.0+1.8+.4+.1=30.1; col 3 = 100.0; col 5 = 30.4; col 7 = 38.4; col 9 = 21.0; and By Board decision = Adopting + Contested in all 15 columns (261=69+192, 1.8=.5+1.3, 5.7=1.5+4.2, 203=60+143, 2.0=.6+1.4, 32=4+28, 1.2=.2+1.0, 17=5+12, 1.4=.4+1.0, 4=0+4, 5.8=0+5.8, 5=0+5, 1.2=0+1.2). DOUBTFUL CELLS: - "After hearing opened, before trial examiner's decision" (the one under Dismissal), columns 3 and 5: printed as bare "0" with no visible decimal point, while column 2 of the same row clearly reads ".0". These are probably ".0" with the point lost in the scan; transcribed as printed. - "By circuit court of appeals decree", column 9: bare "0"; likewise possibly ".0". The column-9 sum under Dismissal (19.6+1.4=21.0) works with either reading. - "After issuance of complaint, before opening of hearing" (under Dismissal), column 7: read as ".2". The column-7 sum under Dismissal requires .2 (36.8+.2+1.2+.2=38.4), although 3 cases out of the ~2,658 column base would round to .1. - "Before issuance of complaint" (under Dismissal), column 13: a short stray ink mark sits immediately left of 20.3; it is a scan artifact, not a minus sign or a digit, and is not transcribed. - "After T.X.D., before Board decision": printed as "After T.X D , before Board decision"; the periods in the abbreviation are faint/dropped. Transcribed with the intended punctuation. FOOTNOTE REFERENCES: Column 10 of both "Before issuance of complaint" rows holds a raised 2 in parentheses standing in place of a value (a pointer to footnote 2, not a quantity). Transcribed literally as "(2)" rather than with the caret convention, since there is no value for the marker to attach to. DASH RULES: Cells filled with a dash rule ("------") are transcribed as "". In the 10(k) Actions row, columns 3 through 9 and 12 through 15 are dash rules or blank. Footnote 1 has no visible terminal period after "definition of terms" (it runs to the right edge of the measure); transcribed without one.