Formal Actions Taken in Representation and Union Deauthorization Cases, Fiscal Year 1998

p. 144. Seven columns: stub plus "Cases in which formal actions taken", "Total formal actions taken^2", RC, RM, RD, UD. The spanner "Formal actions taken by type of case" covers the six value columns; the stub heading spans both heading levels. "Review of Regional Directors' decisions" is printed on its own line with no values, with the indented "Requests for review received" on the next line carrying 473/427/367/16/44/4; I treated them as a section line plus a data row rather than one wrapped label, matching the later section lines "Regional Directors' decisions" and "Outcome", which likewise carry no values. The label printed as "Board decision after review, total" shows a small stray mark above the line between "after" and "review". It is almost certainly a scan speck, not a footnote marker (only markers 1 and 2 exist, and 2 belongs to the "Total formal actions taken" heading), so I did not transcribe it; flagged here in case the original carries something. Other stray scan marks that are not data: a short dash in the RD column of the "Elections directed" row (value 32); a small hook in the UD column of the "Withdrawn after request granted, before Board review" row (value 0); a dash immediately left of "3" in the RC column of the "Modified" row; and a speck under the stub heading. All cells were read as the digits given. No arithmetic was altered. Every row is internally consistent: RC+RM+RD equals the "Total formal actions taken" figure (UD excluded per footnote 2), and the subtotals sum to their totals in both the "Cases in which" and "Total formal actions" columns.

p. 145. Continuation page of Table 3B; the caption carries footnote marker 1, recorded separately from the grid. Apparent arithmetic problems in the source, transcribed exactly as printed: the first row, "Decision on objections and/or challenges, total" (198 / 195 / 186 / 0 / 9 / 1), is far smaller than the sum of its two indented sub-rows "By Regional Directors" (39 / 37) and "By Board" (457 / 445), which sum to 496 / 482. Likewise "By Board" (457 / 445) exceeds the sum of its two listed sub-rows "In stipulated elections" (410 / 403) and "In directed elections" (40 / 35), which sum to 450 / 438. Nothing was computed or corrected. All other rows are internally consistent with RC+RM+RD equalling the "Total formal actions taken" column, as footnote 2 (UD not included) implies. Digit legibility: several "1" glyphs print as a thin slab serif that reads like a lowercase "l" (e.g. the 1 in the UD column of row 1, "192" and "170" in the "Exceptions to Regional Directors' reports" row, and the 1s in the "Withdrawn before request ruled upon" and "Modified" rows); all were read as the digit 1. There is a small stray ink speck just left of the 9 in the RD column of the first row and a small speck above the 2 in the RC column of the "Reversed" row; both are treated as scan artifacts, not footnote markers. The two section lines, "Review of Regional Directors' supplemental decisions" and "Regional Directors' decisions", carry labels only; their value cells are blank in the image.