Types of Unfair Labor Practices Alleged, Fiscal Year 1985

p. 158. Crop shows only the lower part of the page: no column headings are printed on it, so header_rows is empty. The columns are the stub, a count column and a percent column (three columns throughout). At the very top edge the crop clips the last line of the preceding section (part A, charges against employers under sec. 8(a)): a sliver of a row label and of its two value cells is visible but illegible, so that row is not transcribed here. Decimal points: the percent column is printed with one decimal (100.0, 61.4, ...), but the 1-bit scan does not resolve the periods, which appear as blank gaps ("100 0", "61 4"). I have transcribed them with the decimal point restored. The same applies to the abbreviation periods in the two section lines, which show as double spaces in the scan: "B. Charges filed against unions under sec. 8(b)" and "Subsections of Sec. 8(b)". Nothing else was altered. "Subsections of Sec. 8(b)" is printed as an unindented section line with no values; the indented "Total cases" line beneath it carries 10,065 and 100.0, so they are given as two separate rows. "B. Charges filed against unions under sec. 8(b)" and "Recapitulation^1" are centred section banners spanning the width of the table and carry no values. The raised 1 on "Recapitulation" is a footnote marker; the footnote text itself is not inside this crop (no footnotes are printed below the closing rule), so footnotes is empty. Scanning specks, not content: a small mark in the open stub area of the 8(b)(1) row, two marks in the 8(b)(7)/8(b)(1)(2) band, a tick in the stub of the 8(b)(1)(3)(6) row, and a comma-like speck immediately after the 0.7 in the 8(b)(1)(2)(3) percent cell (the cell is read as 0.7). Internal arithmetic checks all pass as printed: the 20 subsection rows sum to 10,065, and each recapitulation line equals the sum of the detail rows containing that subsection (e.g. 8(b)(1) = 7,858; 8(b)(2) = 1,420; 8(b)(3) = 825; 8(b)(5) = 28; 8(b)(6) = 30). No suspected misprints.

p. 159. This is the continuation page of Table 2 (sections B.1, B.2, C and D); sections A and B begin on the preceding page, so no part of the body on this crop is cut off, but the table does not start here. Three printed columns: stub, "Number of cases showing specific allegations", "Percent of total cases"; the stub column has no printed heading, so header cell 0 is empty. The scan has dropped most periods. Every value in the percent column is printed with the decimal point invisible (it images as a gap: "100 0", "8 5", "0 6", "66 5"); since these are one-decimal percentages I have written them with the decimal point restored ("100.0", "8.5", "0.6", "66.5"). The digits themselves are legible and unambiguous. Likewise the section-line labels image as "B1", "B2", "C", "D" and "sec" with wide gaps where periods almost certainly stood ("B. 1.", "B. 2.", "C.", "D.", "sec."); I transcribed those labels with the visible characters only, so a reader should assume the periods are present in the original print. The two footnotes are transcribed with sentence-ending and abbreviation periods restored on the same reasoning (the scan shows gaps after "Act", "cases", "Sec" and "practices"). Row-label parentheses are broken in places by the 1-bit scan (e.g. "8(b)(4)(C)" images closer to "8(b)4)(C)"); all such labels have been written in their standard form. The superscript 1 on the two "Recapitulation" section lines is a footnote marker and is recorded as ^1. Footnote 2 is printed under this table but its marker appears only in the earlier portion of the table on the previous page, not on this crop. Minor scan specks that are not content: a comma-like mark in the percent column beside 8(b)(4)(D), an apostrophe-like mark to the right of "B2 Analysis of 8(b)(7)", a small mark in the stub beside "Total cases 8(e)", and a short dash near "8(b)(7)(A)" in the second recapitulation. The ruled box below "Total cases 8(g)" encloses no printed row and was not transcribed.