Analysis of Methods of Disposition of Jurisdictional Dispute Cases Closed Prior to Unfair Labor Practice Proceedings, Fiscal Year 1988

p. 221. Three printed columns, one heading level. The table has no separate section-label rows: each of the four method lines (Agreement of the parties—informal settlement; Compliance with Board decision and determination of dispute; Withdrawal; Dismissal) carries its own values, and the indented stage lines beneath it break it down; double rules separate these blocks. Faint/dropped decimal points in the "Percent of total closed" column: the scan shows "39 7" for "Agreement of the parties—informal settlement", "0 4" for the "After opening of 10(k) hearing..." line under that heading, and "0 9" for "By Board decision and determination of dispute". I transcribed these as 39.7, 0.4 and 0.9 — the period is lost to scan degradation, not absent from the typesetting (the identically valued "Withdrawal" row prints 91 / 39.7 with a visible point, and the block sums confirm each value). Transcribed as printed, not recomputed: the four method percentages sum to 99.9, not the printed 100.0 total; and the Withdrawal stage percentages (32.8 + 4.8 + 2.2 + 0.0) sum to 39.8 against the printed 39.7 for that method. All case counts add correctly (91 + 3 + 91 + 44 = 229). A stray typographic mark (a small dot below the stub heading, and a tick above the "Withdrawal" rule) appears in the image; these are scan artifacts, not footnote markers.