NLRB Stats Archive › Annual Reports › FY1994 › Types of Unfair Labor Practices Alleged, Fiscal Year 1994
Types of Unfair Labor Practices Alleged, Fiscal Year 1994
Stitched from pp. 103–104.
| Number of cases showing specific allegations | Percent of total cases | |
|---|---|---|
| A. Charges filed against employers under Sec. 8(a) | ||
| Subsections of Sec. 8(a): | ||
| Total cases | 26,058 | 100.0 |
| 8(a)(1) | 4,332 | 16.6 |
| 8(a)(1)(2) | 227 | 0.9 |
| 8(a)(1)(3) | 9,699 | 37.2 |
| 8(a)(1)(4) | 195 | 0.7 |
| 8(a)(1)(5) | 7,778 | 29.8 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(3) | 206 | 0.8 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(4) | 6 | 0.0 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(5) | 174 | 0.7 |
| 8(a)(1)(3)(4) | 641 | 2.5 |
| 8(a)(1)(3)(5) | 2,496 | 9.6 |
| 8(a)(1)(4)(5) | 24 | 0.1 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(3)(4) | 16 | 0.1 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(3)(5) | 116 | 0.4 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(4)(5) | 6 | 0.0 |
| 8(a)(1)(3)(4)(5) | 94 | 0.4 |
| 8(a)(1)(2)(3)(4)(5) | 48 | 0.2 |
| Recapitulation | ||
| 8(a)(1) | 26,058 | 100.0 |
| 8(a)(2) | 799 | 3.1 |
| 8(a)(3) | 13,316 | 51.1 |
| 8(a)(4) | 1,030 | 4.0 |
| 8(a)(5) | 10,736 | 41.2 |
| B. Charges filed against unions under Sec. 8(b) | ||
| Subsections of Sec. 8(b): | ||
| Total cases | 8,674 | 100.0 |
| 8(b)(1) | 6,168 | 71.1 |
| 8(b)(2) | 39 | 0.4 |
| 8(b)(3) | 168 | 1.9 |
| 8(b)(4) | 743 | 8.6 |
| 8(b)(5) | 4 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(6) | 9 | 0.1 |
| 8(b)(7) | 114 | 1.3 |
| 8(b)(1)(2) | 868 | 10.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(3) | 327 | 3.8 |
| 8(b)(1)(5) | 2 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(6) | 3 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(2)(3) | 5 | 0.1 |
| 8(b)(2)(5) | 1 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(2)(3) | 212 | 2.4 |
| 8(b)(1)(2)(5) | 3 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(2)(6) | 1 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(3)(5) | 1 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(3)(6) | 1 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(2)(3)(6) | 1 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(2)(3)(5) | 1 | 0.0 |
| 8(b)(1)(2)(3)(6) | 3 | 0.0 |
| Recapitulation | ||
| 8(b)(1) | 7,590 | 87.5 |
| 8(b)(2) | 1,134 | 13.1 |
| 8(b)(3) | 719 | 8.3 |
| 8(b)(4) | 743 | 8.6 |
| 8(b)(5) | 12 | 0.1 |
| 8(b)(6) | 18 | 0.2 |
| 8(b)(7) | 114 | 1.3 |
| B1. Analysis of 8(b)(4) | ||
| Total cases 8(b)(4) | 743 | 100.0 |
| 8(b)(4)(A) | 58 | 7.8 |
| 8(b)(4)(B) | 424 | 57.1 |
| 8(b)(4)(C) | 6 | 0.8 |
| 8(b)(4)(D) | 211 | 28.4 |
| 8(b)(4)(A)(B) | 40 | 5.4 |
| 8(b)(4)(A)(C) | 1 | 0.1 |
| 8(b)(4)(B)(C) | 1 | 0.1 |
| 8(b)(4)(A)(B)(C) | 2 | 0.3 |
| Recapitulation | ||
| 8(b)(4)(A) | 101 | 13.6 |
| 8(b)(4)(B) | 467 | 62.9 |
| 8(b)(4)(C) | 10 | 1.3 |
| 8(b)(4)(D) | 211 | 28.4 |
| B2. Analysis of 8(b)(7) | ||
| Total cases 8(b)(7) | 114 | 100.0 |
| 8(b)(7)(A) | 33 | 28.9 |
| 8(b)(7)(B) | 8 | 7.0 |
| 8(b)(7)(C) | 69 | 60.5 |
| 8(b)(7)(A)(B) | 2 | 1.8 |
| 8(b)(7)(A)(C) | 1 | 0.9 |
| 8(b)(7)(A)(B)(C) | 1 | 0.9 |
| Recapitulation | ||
| 8(b)(7)(A) | 37 | 32.5 |
| 8(b)(7)(B) | 11 | 9.6 |
| 8(b)(7)(C) | 71 | 62.3 |
| C. Charges filed under Sec 8(e) | ||
| Total cases 8(e) | 27 | 100.0 |
| Against unions alone | 27 | 100.0 |
| D. Charges filed under Sec. 8(g) | ||
| Total cases 8(g) | 23 | 100.0 |
- 1 A single case may include allegations of violations of more than one subsection of the Act. Therefore, the total of the various allegations is greater than the total number of cases.
0 of 77 figures sit in a row or column sum that works out.
Reader’s notes
p. 103. Three columns: stub, "Number of cases showing specific allegations", "Percent of total cases". The three centered lines "A. Charges filed against employers under Sec. 8(a)", "Recapitulation^1" and "B. Charges filed against unions under Sec. 8(b)" are section lines that span the full table width; their value cells are empty. Scan-quality points: (1) In the percent column the decimal point failed to print in a few cells, which show as a gap: "16 6" for 8(a)(1), "0 9" for 8(a)(1)(2) and "3 1" for 8(a)(2) in the Recapitulation block. I transcribed them as 16.6, 0.9 and 3.1, consistent with the rest of the column and with the implied shares. (2) The period after "Sec" in the "A. Charges filed against employers under Sec. 8(a)" heading is not visible in the scan (extra white space instead); the parallel B heading prints it clearly, so I kept it. (3) The stub line "Subsections of Sec. 8(b):" ends in a mark that reads more like a raised dot than a colon in this scan; the parallel 8(a) line prints a colon, so I transcribed a colon. (4) A small stray speck sits just left of the value 16 in the row 8(a)(1)(2)(3)(4); I read it as scanner dirt, not a footnote marker or a digit, so the cell is 16. The marker "1" on "Recapitulation" has no footnote text visible on this crop — the footnote is either below the crop boundary or printed elsewhere, so `footnotes` is empty. No arithmetic was checked or corrected; all values are as printed.
p. 104. Three columns: stub, "Number of cases showing specific allegations" (printed with an end-of-line hyphen in "al-legations", rejoined), and "Percent of total cases". The stub heading cell is blank on the page. The centred lines "Recapitulation^1" (three occurrences), "B1. Analysis of 8(b)(4)", "B2. Analysis of 8(b)(7)", "C. Charges filed under Sec 8(e)" and "D. Charges filed under Sec. 8(g)" are section headings spanning the stub with no values; their value cells are "". In section heading C the word "Sec" is printed without a period (and with a wide gap before "8(e)"), while heading D has "Sec."; both are transcribed as printed. The scan is a 1-bit facsimile in which the dot over "i" is often lost (e.g. "showmg", "Recapitulation", "unions"); these are rendered with normal spelling. All digits are clear and the internal arithmetic of the recapitulation blocks is self-consistent (e.g. 58+40+1+2 = 101; 69+1+1 = 71), which supports the reading. This page is the continuation ("—Continued") of Table 2; the earlier portion of the table is on the preceding page and is not part of this crop.
Source image
Source data: U.S. NLRB Annual Reports (public domain). Reconstruction by NLRB Stats Archive. Read by claude-opus-5 (effort max, prompt extract_v1) from the 300-dpi scan; stitched by page. Updated October 2026.