Analysis of Method of Disposition of Unfair Labor Practice Cases Closed, Fiscal Year 1966

p. 209. 16 columns: stub + "All C cases" (Number, Percent of total closed, Percent of total method) + six two-column groups (CA, CB, CC, CD, CE, CP), each Number and Percent of total closed. Decimal points: in this 1-bit scan the decimal point inside almost every percentage failed to print, so the cells read as e.g. "100 0", "26 0", "0 8". Two cells did retain a visible point ("1.5" at Board decision / CD percent, "0.5" at Consent decree / CP percent), confirming the format is one decimal place throughout. I have therefore written all percentages with the decimal point restored ("100.0", "26.0", "0.8"). No digits were changed, computed or rounded. Cut off by the crop: the table clearly continues past the bottom rule — the "Compliance with" block ends mid-list (Trial examiner's decision, Board decision, with no "Court decision" line), and the remaining disposition categories (withdrawals, dismissals, etc.) and the printed footnotes are not on this image. Footnote markers 1 (in the caption) and 2 (in the body) are referenced but their texts are below the crop, so `footnotes` is empty. "(2)" in the CD cases / Number column of "Before issuance of complaint" is printed as a parenthesized footnote reference standing in place of a figure; the matching CD percent cell is a dash rule. Transcribed as printed. Dash rules ("------") were read as "" in: Percent of total method for "Total number of cases closed"; and the CD / CE / CP percent cells wherever the count is 0 (or "(2)"). Row labels: "Informal settlement" and "Formal settlement" each carry a small smudged mark (reading like a raised dot and a comma respectively) between the word and the leader dots; I read these as leader-dot artifacts rather than punctuation or footnote markers and dropped them. The two "Stipulated decision" / "Consent decree" pairs are distinct printed rows (one pair under "After issuance of complaint, before opening of hearing", one under "After hearing opened"); the duplicate labels are as printed, not an error.

p. 210. CONTINUATION PAGE: no column headings are printed on this crop, so header_rows is empty. The grid has 16 columns (stub + 15 numeric), read off the column rules: an "all cases" number column, two percent columns beside it (percent of all cases closed, and percent-of-method distribution), then six number/percent pairs for the individual case types. This is confirmed arithmetically — the six number columns sum exactly to the all-cases number on every row (Withdrawal 4,107+1,127+406+0+24+140 = 5,804; Dismissal 3,020+1,041+213+2+36+112 = 4,424; Contested 227+27+37+6+4+12 = 313), and the percent-of-method column sums to 100.0 within both the Withdrawal and Dismissal blocks. The first four rows continue a section (compliance/Board-decision branch) whose parent headings are on the preceding page. DECIMAL POINTS: this is a 1-bit scan and the decimal point in the percent columns is dropped in most cells, printing as a gap ("37 2", "0 4"). The points are plainly present in the type where the scan retained them ("0.7" in the CA column of "After issuance of complaint, before opening of hearing"; "27. 9" in the CE column of Withdrawal/"Before issuance of complaint"; ". 0" in the "Otherwise" row). I have transcribed every percent cell with its decimal point. The two "Otherwise" percents are printed without a leading zero (".0") and are given that way. "(2)" CELLS: in the CD number column of both "Before issuance of complaint" rows (under Withdrawal and under Dismissal) the cell holds only a raised footnote reference in parentheses, not a value; transcribed literally as "(2)" per footnote 2. "Dismissal^1": a small raised mark sits immediately after "Dismissal" and before the leader dots. I read it as a superscript 1 pointing to footnote 1, but at this resolution it could be a scan artifact. APPARENT MISPRINT: the row at the "Adopting ... (no exceptions filed)" position under "By Board decision" (Dismissal block) is printed "trail examiner's decision", not "trial"; the identical row near the top of the crop reads "trial". Transcribed as printed in both places. MINOR ROUNDING ODDITIES (transcribed as printed, not corrected): with the CE column total of 86 implied elsewhere, "Circuit court of appeals decree" CE percent prints 1.1 where 1/86 rounds to 1.2; and the two CE values of 2 under "By Board decision" print as 2.4 and 2.3, which sum to the parent's 4.7. Likewise "Contested" (row 2) CD percent prints 1.3 where 6/483 rounds to 1.2. These look like the original's sum-adjusted rounding rather than misreadings. Cells holding only a dash rule ("------") or left blank are given as "". A stray ink dot follows the dash rule in the CD percent column of "After issuance of complaint, before opening of hearing" (Withdrawal block); that cell is treated as empty. The vertical signature mark in the left margin ("227-541-67-14") is omitted.