Formal Actions Taken in Representation and Union Deauthorization Cases, Fiscal Year 1986

p. 229. Seven columns: stub, "Cases in which formal actions taken", then "Total formal actions taken", RC, RM, RD, UD under the spanner "Formal actions taken by type of case". A double vertical rule separates RD from UD, and the arithmetic confirms UD sits outside the "Total formal actions taken" column: e.g. "By Regional Directors" 754+71+162 = 987, with UD 15 excluded; likewise "Initial hearings" 846+65+173 = 1,084 with UD 7 excluded. Scan quality: the page is a degraded 1-bit scan with light, broken type. Digit-grouping commas in the thousands values are faint or dropped by the scan ("1 328", "1 019", "1 084", "1 061", "1 016", "1 121"); I have written them with commas in line with the clearly printed "1,282" and "1,107". Apostrophes in "Review of Regional Directors' decisions" and "Regional Directors' decisions" and the commas in "Hearings completed, total" and "Board action on request ruled upon, total" are not legible in the scan but are supplied from the obvious parallel wording of neighbouring labels ("Decisions issued, total", "Board decision after review, total"). Arithmetic inconsistencies, transcribed as printed/read, not corrected: - "Decisions issued, total", RC column: read as 845, but the row does not add (845+73+168 = 1,086, not the printed total 1,061) and the components below do not sum to it (By Regional Directors 754 + By Board 66 = 820). 820 would satisfy both checks, so either the source misprints this cell or the faint digits are 820; I read 845. - "Requests for review received": 563+19+51 = 633 against the printed total 632 (off by one). - Under "Outcome", the two rows do not reconcile with "Board decision after review, total" in the RC, RM and RD columns: RC 25+16 = 41 vs 50; RM 2+0 = 2 vs 1; RD 6+6 = 12 vs 5. The stub and Total columns do reconcile (39+24 = 63; 34+22 = 56). The "Election directed" row also does not add across (25+2+6+0 = 33 vs total 34). These cells are faint; the RC value 25 and the two RD values of 6 in these rows are the least certain in the table. The caption carries a superscript footnote marker 1 ("Fiscal Year 1986^1"), but no footnote text is printed below the table within this crop; the footnote presumably appears elsewhere on the page or has been cut off, so `footnotes` is empty.

p. 230. Seven columns: stub, "Cases in which formal actions taken" (a tall single heading, repeated in both heading levels), then the spanner "Formal actions taken by type of case" over the five columns Total formal actions taken / RC / RM / RD / UD. Doubtful cell: row "Granted", column RC. The second digit is worn in the scan; it reads most like 15 and is transcribed as printed. Arithmetic argues for 16 on two independent checks — the column above it gives 118 - 102 - 0 = 16, and the row's own "Total formal actions taken" of 22 equals RC + RM + RD only if RC is 16 (16 + 1 + 5). Treat this cell as uncertain. Throughout the table the "Total formal actions taken" column equals RC + RM + RD and excludes UD (e.g. the top row: 710 + 69 + 190 = 969, with UD 14 outside it; 182 + 16 + 45 = 243 with UD 8 outside). This is consistent in every row, so it appears to be how the column is defined rather than a misprint, but it means the total column is not the sum of the four case-type columns beside it. "Review of Regional Directors supplemental decisions" and "Regional Directors' decisions" are section lines carrying a label only; their value cells are blank in the image. A stray ink mark (a small pen stroke/arrow) sits just after the label "Request for review received"; it is not a footnote marker and is not transcribed. The page is a "—Continued" page; the body is complete down to the footnote rule, and no part of the grid is cut off by the crop.