Toronto Star Newspapers Limited v. Graphic Arts International Union, No. 35, G.A.I.U. and Printing and Graphic Communications Union No. N-1, 1980 CanLII 873

[1980] OLRB Rep. April 565

1309-79-JD Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, Complainant, v. Graphic Arts International Union, No. 35, G.A.I.U. and Printing and Graphic Communications Union No. N-1, Respondents.

BEFORE: Kevin M. Burkett, Alternate Chairman and Board Members JA. Ronson and W.F. Rutherford.

APPEARANCES: Derek L. Rogers, James Nicol, C.J. Davies, P. Dawson and Jack Seymour for the applicant; H. Caley for the respondent Graphic Arts International Union; A. Ryder for the respondent Printing and Graphic Communications Union.

DECISION OF THE BOARD; April 15, 1980.

1. This is an application filed by the applicant employer under section 81(18) of the Act. The application pertains to the assignment of work in connection with the production of photomechanical press plates at the Toronto Star. The applicant company is party to col­lective agreements with both the Graphic Arts International Union, No. 35, G.A.I.U. (hereinafter referred to as the photoengravers) and the Printing and Graphic Communica­tions Union No. N-1 (hereinafter referred to as the sterotypers). These agreements contain conflicting provisions as to the jurisdiction of the respective unions to a portion of the work referred to above. This application was filed on October 9, 1979. At the time the application was filed the company planned to assign all work in connection with the production of pho­tomechanical plates to the sterotypers in December, 1979 and did in fact make the assign­ment as planned. The applicant company seeks to have the Board exercise its discretion un­der section 81 (18) of the Act to resolve the conflict in the two aforementioned agreements and specifically asks the Board to alter the provisions of the photoengravers' collective agreement to remove its claim to that part of the work to which it is given jurisdiction in its collective agreement. Section 81(18) of the Act provides:

"Where an employer is a party to or is bound by two or more collective agreements and it appears that the description of the bargaining unit in one of such agreements conflicts with the description of the bargaining unit in the other or another of such agreements, the Board may, upon the application of the employer or any of the trade unions concerned, alter the description of the bargaining units in any such agreement as it considers proper, and the agreement or agreements shall be deemed to have been altered accordingly."

The photoengravers, in response to the company's application, seek to have the Board award all of the work in connection with the production of photomechanical plates to its members.

2. The jurisdictional dispute which is before us has its roots in the rapid technologi­cal advances which have altered the method of producing a major newspaper in the last ten years. As late as 1974 the Toronto Star was produced by a "hot metal" process. News and editorial type, made from molten metal, photographs photomechanically imposed on a metal sheet, and illustrations cast into lead reproductions were arranged on a portable table in the form of a newspaper page and locked into place. The hot metal typesetting was per­formed by composing room personnel, the lead reproduced illustrations (comics, advertise­ments etc.) were prepared by sterotypers and the photographic material was prepared by photoengravers. The metal configuration referred to as a chase, and weighing over 75 pounds, was locked into place by composing room personnel and wheeled to sterotypers lo­cated on the same floor. The sterotypers then placed a semi-moist piece of cardboard over the chase and rolled it under a molder. The pressure applied by the molder forced an im­pression of the page into the moist cardboard capturing the pattern on the page. The matrix or mat was then dropped to a second floor foundry where sterotypers trimmed it, packed the open areas, dried and cylindrically shaped it so that the impression of the page was to the inside. Molten lead was then applied under pressure to the inside face of the mat, picking up the fine detail in the same cylindrical shape. The lead reproduction, with the printing surface now elevated and to the outside, was then taken by conveyor and affixed to the presses. Each day six to eight lead press plates of each page of the newspaper would be made in this manner depending on the number of presses running on the particular day.

3. In 1974 the Toronto Star moved to a "cold metal" process. Photographic typeset­ting machines were installed and the type produced was cut by scissors and pasted on to a cardboard sheet the size of a newspaper page. Where in the past the illustrations had been prepared by the sterotypers in the form of lead reproductions, both the illustrations and the photographic material were now prepared by photoengravers using photomechanical equipment for inclusion in the paste-up. There was no dispute at the time with respect to the jurisdiction of the photoengravers to perform this work. The full page paste-up was sent from the composing room to the photoengraving department where a metal photoengraving of the full page was made. The metal photoengraving was then returned to the composing room and forwarded to the sterotypers located on the same floor. It was placed on a metal base, the semi-moist cardboard was placed on top of it and pressure applied by the molder. The resulting mat was no different than the one produced under the "hot metal" process and the drying, shaping and casting of the lead reproduction were performed by sterotypers as they had been under the "hot metal" process. Until 1977, therefore, the change in the process from "hot metal" to "cold metal" was confined to the production of the form from which the sterotypers took the image of a full page. The image was produced in large part by photoengravers using photomechanical means. Sterotypers were no longer required to pro­duce the illustrations as they had in the past. However, their traditional molding and casting functions were carried on as they had been under the "hot metal" process.

4. In 1977 the Toronto Star moved from a metal photoengraving to a plastic pho­toengraving of the full page paste-up. Under this system the photoengraver, using a new­spager camera, takes a photograph of the full page paste-up and places the negative over a specially treated plastic plate with a thin metal backing. The evidence establishes that the newspager camera is a relatively simple piece of photographic equipment to operate. The negative is then exposed to ultra violet light thereby causing the specially treated plastic to become fixed and harden where the print and photos appear on the negative. The negative is then removed and the plastic sheet is placed in a "Napp processor" which applies a caustic solution to wash away or etch the areas of the plastic plate not hardened by the exposure. The result is a plastic plate with the print raised or elevated. The "Napp processor” is an au­tomated piece of equipment which does not require technical skills to operate. The plate is then forwarded to the sterotypers who produce a mat and repeat the shaping and casting functions which have been described. Again this innovation did not disturb the traditional job functions of the sterotypers carried on in connection with the production of lead-casted press plates. Under this system, however, the plate produced by the photoengravers from which the lead duplicates are made is plastic rather than metal.

5. In December of 1979 the technology took another major step forward as the com­pany moved to a direct plate system. The presses were modified to accept the thin plastic plate produced by photomechanical means and as a result the casting work traditionally per­formed by the sterotypers in the production of a duplicate plate was eliminated. The plastic plate produced using the technology and processes described above can now be applied di­rectly to the presses. With the exception of crimping the metal backing to the plastic plate no further work is required to prepare the plate for attachment to the presses. The molding, drying, shaping and casting operations previously performed in the making of a lead repro­duction of the plastic pattern plate have been eliminated.

6. In ~i memo dated December 7, 1979, the Toronto Star announced its decision with respect to the assignment of work between the sterotypers and the photoengravers under the Direct plastic Plate System. The memo, over the signature of Mr. J. Seymour, the pro­duction manager of the company, reads:

"This will confirm The Star's decision that when we convert to direct printing we will assign direct platemaking work in the following manner: —

1. All full page paste-ups for direct printing — black or colour — which can be processed through the Newspager camera as a straight line shot will be handled by Stereo staff.

2. All other full page paste-ups for direct printing which require addi­tional work such as screens, surprints, stripping, etc., will be proc­essed through Engraving to obtain a final page negative, then for­warded to Stero for plate processing.

Because of conflicting language in the Engravers and Sterotypers con­tracts, The Star has asked the Ontario Labour Relations Board to make a determination with respect to these matters.

Hearings have been scheduled for December 20th and 21st at which time the interested parties will make representations in front of the Board. The above work assignment procedures will, however, be fol­lowed unless changed by order of the Ontario Labour Relations Board."

Under the company's work assignment the photoengravers will continue to perform all of the pre paste-up photographic functions in connection with illustrations and photographs. However, the photoengravers will no longer be responsible for the operation of the new­spager camera and the taking of the negative of the full page paste-up, the exposure of the negative on the plastic plate and the etching of the plastic plate through the Napp processor. Under the company's work assignment these functions, formerly performed by the pho­toengravers. are assigned to the sterotypers. The newspager camera has been moved from the photoengravers' work area to the work area formerly used by the sterotypers to produce the cardboard mold of the pattern plate. The exposure tower and the Napp processor have been moved from the photoengravers' work area on the fifth floor to what was formerly the sterotypers foundry on the second floor.

7. Mr. Seymour gave evidence in support of the company's work assignment. In his view the sterotypers are more closely linked to the printing operation and have historically satisfied the requirements of the company in respect of the quality and quantity of press plates required on a daily basis. Although the sterotypers had never operated photome­chanical equipment prior to December, 1979, they have been trained by the company and are now operating the equipment used in the direct plate process to the satisfaction of the company. Mr. Seymour referred to certain restrictions in the photoengravers' collective agreement (Sunday work, night shift, working rules, lunch periods) as mitigating against as­signing the work to the photoengravers. The work assignment was a major issue in the last round of negotiations, however, and the company did not raise its concerns in respect of these matters at the bargaining table. In any event, Mr. Seymour referred in cross-examina­tion to the Sunday premium concern as a "throw-in" and testified that the lunch hour diffi­culty could be worked out. In the event the Board considered splitting the assignment and leaving the photoengravers with the operation of the newspager camera and the production of the negative, Mr. Seymour expressed his concern at the additional step which would be created (i.e. composing room to photoengravers to sterotypers rather than directly from composing room to sterotypers). He referred to the additional clerical tasks necessary to log the flow of work and the requirement to assign responsibility between departments in the event of an error. The evidence establishes, however, that the negative is presently logged between the sterotypers on the fifth floor and those on the second. It was established that the backup camera to the newspager is located in the photoengraving department on the fifth floor.

8. Prior to the introduction of the direct plate process there were 36 sterotypers and 24 photoengravers employed at the Toronto Star. The introduction of the direct plate sys­tem will result in a loss of 20 jobs at the Star. If the sterotypers are assigned the entire proc­ess their numbers will shrink from 36 to 20 while the number of photoengravers will shrink from 24 to 20. If the process is assigned in its entirety to the photoengravers, however, the number of sterotypers will be reduced from 36 to zero while the number of photoengravers will increase from 24 to 40. Assignment of the entire process to the photoengravers will eliminate the sterotyping trade at the Toronto Star and will result in a substantial increase in the number of photoengravers. Four employees are required to operate the newspager cam­era and produce the negatives of the full page paste-up. If the photoengravers are given just this work their numbers will remain the same while the number of sterotypers will decrease by an additional 4 to a total of 16. The sterotypers union also represents pressmen and mail room employees at the Toronto Star, totalling some 250 employees.

9. The parties to this matter put their collective mind to the question of work assign­ment in connection with the direct plate process in the negotiation of the respective January 1, 1977 - December 31, 1978 collective agreements. The photoengravers' collective agree­ment, which expired on December31, 1978, contains a supplemental agreement re Napp di­rect plastic pattern plate and Napp direct plastic printing plate which provides in part:

"With respect to Napp direct plastic printing plates (or other direct plastic printing plates processed and used in a like manner) letterpress photoengraving work shall consist of making negatives and any strip­ping of the negatives which may be required in the processing of such printing plates but shall not include printing frame exposure of nega­tives to plate, washout or development and the preparation of such plate for attachment to the press."

Similarly the sterotypers' collective agreement for the same period contains a supplemental agreement under the same heading which provides in part:

"When Napp direct plastic printing plates (or other direct plastic print­ing plates processed and used in a like manner) are to be used as press plates, Sterotyping work shall consist of processing such plates from prnting frame exposure of negatives to plates, washout or develop­ment, and the preparation of such plates for attachment to the press, but shall not include the making or stripping of negatives."

These agreements represent a tripartite agreement between all three parties as to the assign­ment of work under the direct plate system. The photoengravers were to retain the use of the newspaper camera and the production of the negative of the full page but agreed to re­linquish claim to the printing of the negatives on the plate and the wash-out or etching func­tions. It is established that the parties knew when they negotiated these agreements that the direct plate system would not be introduced during the term of the agreement expiring De­cember 31, 1978. However, Mr. Seymour answered in the affirmative when asked in cross-­examination if the parties could see the Star going to direct at the time these agreements were entered into, and further, answered in the affirmative when asked if they knew it would eliminate the need for a mat and steroplate and if the concerns raised by this applica­tion were threatened at that time.

10. In the negotiation of the renewal to the agreement which expired on December 31, 1978 the Star sought a complete discretion in respect of the assignment of work under the direct plate process. The photoengravers responded by filing an application under section 81 of the Act. [n a decision dated March 27, 1979 (Graphic Arts international Union, Local 35-P and Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, Printing and Graphic Communications Union No. N-I Board File 1881-78-JD) the Board dismissed the application as premature. The pho­toengraver; also filed a complaint under section 79 of the Act alleging in essence an unlawful interference with its bargaining rights. The Board (see Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd, [1979] OLRB Rep. May 451) refused to equate bargaining rights and work jurisdiction in a craft setting and concluded that in its view "this complaint is nothing more than a latent jurisdic­tional dispute." The Board concluded its reasons as follows:

'Our conclusion that this matter has not yet ripened into a jurisdic­tional dispute, however, does not mean that the Star and Local 1 may use the negotiation process to weaken Local 35-P's claim to the work in question. Local 35-P is entitled under section 81 of the Act to have its claim to the work in question dealt with on its merits. Accordingly, any attempt to circumvent the jurisdictional dispute procedures of the Act by either the Star or Local 1 in their bargaining would be inconsistent with the Act, and would amount to a breach of the duty to bargain in good faith. The facts before us, however, do not establish that either of the respondents is attempting to circumvent the jurisdictional dispute procedures under the Act. The Star is merely attempting to bargain for a discretion to assign the work in question, and Local 1 is merely asserting its own claim to such work. Even if the Star were to be successful in establishing a discretion to assign the work, and Local 1 were to con­tinue to maintain its claim to the work, these eventualities would not af­fect the merits of Local 35-P's case under section 81 if a jurisdictional dispute were to materialize."

11. The Photoengravers filed a further complaint on May 18, 1979 alleging that "the Star and the sterotypers have made an agreement which encroaches upon the established bargaining rights of the photo-engraphers by extending recognition to the sterotypers over employees who, until this time, have been represented by the photoengravers." In addition the complaint alleges that "the Star and the sterotypers have used the negotiating process to circumvent the jurisdictional dispute procedures of the Act." The Star and the sterotypers entered into an agreement (January 1, 1979 — December 31, 1981) wherein it is provided that the sterotypers' work shall consist of the making of the full page negative from the full page paste-up in addition to the other work assigned to it under the previous agreement. The Star in turn tabled proposals with the photoengravers which, if accepted, would have ef­fectively extinguished their claim to the making of the full page negative. In its decision (Graphic Arts International Union, Local 35-P and Toronto Star NewsPaper Limited, Print­ing and Graphic Communications Union No. N-i, [1979]OLRB Rep. Aug. 811) the Board commented on the tripartite nature of jurisdictional disputes and the process established un­der the Act to deal with them and concluded that while the parties are encouraged to seek voluntary agreements "any attempt to use economic sanctions or the immediate threat of same to force a settlement or to compromise the position of another in respect of a work as­signment dispute which may become the subject matter of a section 81 complaint is contrary to the scheme of the Act and is, therefore, in violation of section 14 of the Act" and found that the refusal of the Star to withdraw its demand without prejudice to whatever position it might take in a subsequent section 81 complaint constituted a violation of section 14 of the Act. Following release of the Board's decision the Star and the photoengravers returned to the bargaining table and concluded a collective agreement which did not alter the work as­assignments arising out of the implementation of the direct plate process as contained in their previous agreement. The current photoengravers' agreement, therefore, is in conflict with the current sterotypers' agreement in respect of work jurisdiction under the direct plate sys­tem.

12. The Board heard evidence of industry practice in respect of the assignment of work under the direct plate process. The assignment of work at the Globe and Mail is identi­cal to that which has been made by the Star. The evidence establishes, however, that the as­signment was brought about as the result of contract negotiations in 1978. Mr. Joseph Hann, a Vice-President of the sterotypers' union with personal knowledge of the operation at the Globe and Mail, admitted in cross-examination that it was generally thought that the pho­toengravers would get the work prior to the 1978 negotiations at the Globe but that during those negotiations the assignment was turned around. When asked if part of the bargaining consideration which led to the turn around was the fact that the sterotypers also represented pressmen and paper handlers, he replied that it could have had a bearing. The photoengrav­ers refused to sign a collective agreement with the Globe and Mail and no longer have a col­lective bargaining relationship with the Globe and Mail. The sterotypers also have jurisdic­tion over the entire process at the Hamilton Spectator, The Ottawa Journal and The Ottawa Citizen. The process is split between the I.T.U. and the sterotypers at the St. Catharines Standard, the Brantford Expositor, The Niagara Falls' paper and The Kingston-Whig Stan­dard. The I.T.U. has responsibility over the camera and the sterotypers responsibility over plate-making in these establishments. The sterotypers are restricted to the plate-making at the Sudbury Star as well.

13. In addition to the Windsor Star and Inland Publishing the photoengravers enjoy sole jurisdiction over the disputed work at the L'Soleil paper in Quebec City, La Presse in Montreal and n the Pacific Press papers in British Columbia. The assignment at La Presse and at Pacific Press were as the result of binding awards arising out of jurisdictional disputes between the sterotypers and photoengravers. In a decision of the Quebec Labour Court sit­ting in appeal from a decision of a Labour Commissioner (see Graphic Arts International Union Local 55S (F. T. Q. — C. T. C. — C. T. M. vs. La Presse Limitee and Montreal Sterotyp­ers' & Electrotypers' Union, Local 33 and The Newspaper Pressmen's Union of Montreal, Local 41, No. 500-28-00197-772), the processes which have been described in this decision are reviewed at page 9 of the Judgment. The Labour Court states:

"... the modified operations in question relate implicitly to that phase of the said process consisting in the sum of operations accomplished during the photoengraving process. Whether one considers the placing in contact of a negative with a photosensitive enamel, the operation of exposure to ultraviolet light, or finally, the process of development, one is dealing with operations implicitly similar to those normally performed by photoengravers, within the meaning set forth in the Appli­cant's accreditation certificate. It is the photoengraving process which is affected by this technological advance. The tools with which the work of photoengraving is accomplished are cameras, the optical and chemi­cal effects of light, the properties of photosensitive enamels etc. These tools remain the same in the di-litho process, even though it is highly automated. The only thing that is changed is the type of plate upon which these tools are used. The photomechanical operation continues to exist.

The Court went on to state that none of the operations traditionally assigned to sterotypers can be recognized in the new process, and found that "the trade of the sterotyper has been rendered obsolescent by technological process." The Court rejected the argument ad­vanced by the sterotypers (which has also been made in this case) that it should look to the finished product (i.e. the press plate). The Court reasoned that it must look to the process utilized in making the product and determine whether "the work concerned constitutes pho­toengraving independent of whether this work yields a finished product and independent of the particular use the employer may make of the finished product." The Court overturned the ruling of the Labour Commissioner and awarded the work to the photoengravers. The company in that case, as in this, had given the work to the sterotypers.

14. In re Pacific Press, a decision of the British Columbia Labour Relations Board dated May 26, 1977, Professor Weiler, in awarding work jurisdiction over the entire direct plastic plate process to the photoengravers, reviewed the technological developments de­scribed in this decision and concluded that "the function of the sterotypers is wholly elimi­nated," because "... the new operation of making a direct press plate will be largely undis­tinguishable from the current operation of making a pattern plate." Professor Weiler rejected the argument of the sterotypers (the same argument as has been put to us) that the direct plastic plate is the press plate traditionally produced by the sterotypers. He concluded that the primary criterion in analyzing the issue of jurisdiction is "the nature of the work done by the employees not the use made by the employer of the product." While acknowl­edging its relevance, he rejected the sterotypers' argument with respect to job impact and upheld the employer's assignment of the entire process to the photoengravers.

15. The company argues that its assignment of the platemaking to the sterotypers should be upheld by the Board because the photoengravers have never produced a plate for the presses and are not geared to the production demands of making press plates. The com­pany asks the Board to consider this fact, which supports the employer's preference, along with the sterotypers' collective agreement which gives it jurisdiction over the work, the ab­sence of jurisdiction over plate-making in the photoengravers' agreement, the area practice which shows the sterotypers with the full process at the Globe and Mail and at least the plate-making at a number of other papers within the Province, and the devastating impact upon the sterotyper craft if the plate-making was awarded to the photoengravers. The com­pany argues that a consideration of these factors should cause the Board to award work ju­risdiction over the plate-making to the sterotypers; In reference to the production of the negative, the company relies on the simplicity of the newspager camera, which sterotypers have been operating to its satisfaction, the lineal work flow which would result if the stero­typers had jurisdiction over the newspager camera, the area practice, the further loss of ster­otypers' jobs if the camera work is assigned to the photoengravers, and the employer's pref­erence in support of its decision to assign the production of the negative to the sterotypers.

16. The sterotypers ask the Board to maintain its existing function; that is to produce plates for the presses. The sterotypers argue that the newspager camera has taken the place of the molder and the exposure tower and Napp processer have taken the place of the cast­ing equipment but that the function remains the same. Just as typesetters moved from hot metal to photomechanical equipment to perform their function at the Star, the sterotypers ask to be permitted to do the same. The sterotypers also rely on area practice, the devastat­ing impact of an assignment to the photoengravers upon the sterotyper craft at the Star and the employer's preference in support of its claim to jurisdiction over the direct plate process. The sterotypers rely on the absence of a claim to the plate-making part of the process in the photoengravers' agreement as further support to its claim to at least the plate-making. The sterotypers argue that the 1977 agreement was entered into at a time when it was recognized by all parties that the direct plate system would not be introduced during its term and ac­cordingly, asks the Board to discount the importance of that agreement which is no longer binding.

17. The photoengravers take the position that the party which seeks to upset a prior agreement (i.e. the 1977-78 agreement between the parties) must adduce compelling evi­dence that it should be changed. The photoengravers maintain that the employer has failed to demonstrate the economies or efficiencies which would result from an assignment of all the work in dispute to the sterotypers. In the absence of any attempt by the company to raise its concerns at the bargaining table with respect to the terms of the photoengravers' agree­ment which might make it uneconomical or inefficient to assign the work to the photoen­gravers, they ask us to disregard the company's submissions in this regard. The photoen­gravers point out that the "lineal flow" of work desired by the company could also be attained by assigning the entire process to the photoengravers and rely on the production ca­pabilities of photoengravers as evidenced by the assignment of the entire process to the pho­toengravers at a number of major papers across Canada (L'Soleil, La Presse, Windsor Star, Pacific Press). The photoengravers argue that the Board must look to the function or proc­ess and not to the end product as argued by the sterotypers. In support we are referred to the award of Professor Weiler in re Pacific Press, supra, and the Quebec Labour Court decision in La Presse supra. The photoengravers also rely on these decisions in support of its conten­tion that where the two unions have competed for the work the practice has been to award it to the photoergravers. The photoengravers maintain that because the process is a photome­chanical one involving the use of cameras and photosensitive materials it falls within the his­torical work jurisdiction and craft training of the photoengraver. The necessity to train the sterotypers in the operation of the simple newspager camera illustrates this point in the view of the photoengravers. The photoengravers, relying on the fact that they have performed the work in dispute for the past 3 years (the production of photomechanical plates) and the fact that the historical work functions of the sterotypers have been rendered obsolete, argue that the Board should maintain the photoengravers' assignment to the work. At the very least, the photoengravers lay claim to the operation of the newspaper camera and the pro­duction of the full page negative. In support of its claim to at least this portion of the work, the photoengravers rely on the 1977 agreement between the parties and the evidence which established a split jurisdiction in a substantial number of newspapers in Ontario.

18. In assessing the merits of jurisdictional disputes in the construction industry, the Board has looked to 1) collective bargaining relationships, 2) skill and training, 3) consider­ation of economics and efficiency, 4) the employer's practice and 5) area practice. (See Anchor Shoring Limited [1974] OLRB Rep. Aug. 528, Urban Consolidated Construction Corporation Ltd. [1977] OLRB Rep. Feb. 41). In Kingston-Whig Standard Company Lim­ited [1972] OLRB Rep. Nov. 959 the Board was asked to rule on a jurisdictional dispute be­tween the photoengravers and the I.T.U. The paper had moved from a "hot metal" to a "cold metal" process and the dispute was in respect of the plate-making function. There were no sterotypers at the paper. In that case the Board considered 1) area and industry practice, 2) job loss, 3) collective agreements, 4) availability of craftsmen and skills, 5) awards, 6) employer preference. While each case must be decided on its own merits the fac­tors referred to above and those used by the Board in construction industry disputes are use­ful guidelines to be used in assessing the merits of any jurisdictional dispute.

19. We accept the conclusion reached in both Pacific Press, supra, and La Presse, supra, that the Board must look to the nature of the work done by the employees and not the use made by the employer of the end product of the work in dispute. If the end product was to be cast as a primary criterion the result would be to downgrade the importance of skills and ability, and efficiency, as primary criteria. Clearly the skills associated with performing a work process and the efficiency with which it is performed are inter-related factors. A craft union is one whose members "are distinguishable from the other employees and commonly bargain separately and apart from other employees through a trade union that according to established trade union practice pertains to such skills or craft." When called upon to re­solve competing work claims between craft unions the Board must look to the work and de­termine if the skills of one of the crafts are more closely related to the nature of the work in dispute and whether or not the use of these skills by persons trained in the craft will have a bearing on efficiency and economy. If we were to restrict ourselves to the end product these considerations, which must be central to the resolution of any jurisdictional dispute, would become irrelevant.

20. In this case the company will be producing press plates by photomechanical means without the casting of a duplicate lead plate. The plastic pattern plate, which has been produced without objection by the photoengravers since 1977, will become the press plate. The work performed by the photoengravers since 1977 remains virtually unchanged while the work performed by the sterotypers in the casting of a lead plate has been done away with. The entire process is now a photomechanical one. The photoengravers are trained and skilled in the operation of cameras and in the use of photosensitive materials. The sterotypers, on the other hand, had never operated a camera prior to the instant work assignment and other than for the training given them prior to assuming responsibility for the newspager camera had not been trained in the use of cameras or photosensitive materi­als. Although the newspager camera is a relatively simple piece of equipment, and although the Napp processor is automated, the process with which we are concerned falls within the traditional craft function of the photoengravers. The process draws on the skills of persons trained in the use of cameras and photomechanical equipment. A consideration of the na­ture of the process and the skills involved, however rudimentary, weigh in favour of award­ing the entire process to the photoengravers.

21. In this case, however, the Board has before it collective agreements which pro­vide the sterotypers with an exclusive claim to the plate-making function. The photoengrav­ers collective agreement provides jurisdiction over the use of the newspager camera and the production of the full page negative but does not extend jurisdiction to the exposure of the negative on the plate and the etching through the Napp processor or any of the other plate-making functions. The current collective agreements, therefore, suggest a split jurisdiction. This is the same result as reached between the parties in 1977; that is, that the work in dis­pute should be split between the two unions. The evidence establishes that when this agree­ment was reached the parties were aware that the direct plate system would be implemented at the Star, albeit at some future date, and that the impact would be as it has been described to the Board. We reject the submission of the sterotypers that this agreement should be dis­regarded. It is an agreement between all three parties reached at a time when the impact of the process was known but had not been felt. It was negotiated prior to the emotional impact of a work assignment being made to one union or the other but in the knowledge of its effect upon overall employment levels and accordingly, it is a persuasive factor.

22. The Board considered the impact of technological change on the number of jobs affected within each of the competing crafts in the Kingston-Whig Standard case, supra. In the Pacific Press award, supra, Professor Weiler saw job loss as a relevant factor. He com­mented at page 13 of his award that "a union facing technological change should be able to expect that a "med-arb" system such as this one will make an effort to preserve the viability and the integrity of all the units affected by the change in production, to the extent that this is reasonably feasible." In our view the 1977 agreement between the parties, wherein the photoengravers relinquished a substantial portion of their previous work jurisdiction, reflects the concern of all parties with respect to job loss. The plate-making functions which go to the sterotypers under that agreement maintain the steroptypers as a 16 member craft within the Star. If the photoengravers had not agreed to relinquish the plate-making and the assignment had been made to them the sterotypers would have disappeared from the Star. On the basis of the 1977 agreement the photoengravers would have continued as a 20 mem­ber craft when the direct plate process was introduced and the sterotypers as a 16 member craft.

23. We are not inclined to be guided by the assignment of work at the Globe and Mail. The practice in the industry generally is more compelling than the practice which exists at a single newspaper, albeit one within the immediate area. The sterotypers and the photoen­gravers each have exclusive jurisdiction over the entire process at a number of major news­papers. While the process has not been split between these two unions in Ontario, it is sig­nificant that the I.T.U. is responsible for the operation of the camera and the production of the negative and the sterotypers are responsible for the production of the plate from the negative in a number of Ontario papers. This is the same division arrived at by the parties in their voluntary agreement and, in our view, the industry practice supports such a division of the work.

24. The employer's preference in this case is that the entire process be assigned to the sterotypers. While employer preference is a factor to be taken into account, the weight to be given it is directly related to the persuasiveness of the employer's submissions with respect to the adverse impact of a contrary assignment upon his business. This is especially so where the employer is attempting to upset a voluntary agreement between all of the parties to the dispute. While we are prepared to give some weight to the company's submissions with re­spect to the ability of sterotypers to maintain the production schedules required of those producing press plates, we are not persuaded to support its preference with respect to the production of the negative. Regardless of whether the sterotypers or the photoengravers operate the newspager camera on the 5th floor, the pages must be logged through the area. The employer never raised its concerns with respect to the photoengravers' collective agree­ment at the bargaining table and indeed, acknowledged that these matters could be worked out. When reference is had to the skills of photoengravers in operating cameras, the place­ment of the backup camera in the photoengravers' department, the increased flexibility which would result if 4 additional photoengravers were assigned to operate the newspager camera on the 5th floor, and the agreement signed in 1977 giving this work to photoengrav­ers, the employer's current assignment is difficult to comprehend. In our view, the 1977 vol­untary agreement best reflects considerations of economy and efficiency.

25. If the parties had not put their minds to the division of work under the direct plate system and come to an agreement, this Board may nevertheless have been persuaded to split the assignment. Consideration of the impact on jobs, the industry practice, economies and efficiency, the automated nature of the Napp processors and the current collective agree­ments may have caused the Board to assign the operation of the camera and the production of the negative to the photoengravers and the plate-making to the sterotypers. The parties, however, did put their minds to the issue and agreed that the work should be divided be­tween the two unions in the manner described. The agreement was reached at a time when the impact of the process was known but not yet felt. The agreement is persuasive and when reference is had to all of the other evidence before us it is compelling.

26. Accordingly, pursuant to our authority under section 81 of the Act, we hereby di­rect that:

(1) With respect to Napp direct plastic printing plates (or other direct plastic printing plates processed and used in a like manner) letter-press photoengraving work shall consist of making negatives and any stripping of the negative which may be required in the process­ing of such printing plates but shall not include printing frame ex­posure of negatives to plate, washout or development and the preparation of such plate for attachment to the press.

(2) When Napp direct plastic printing plates (or other direct plastic printing plates processed and used in a like manner) are to be used as press plates, Sterotyping work shall consist of processing such plates from printing frame exposure of negatives to plates, wash­out or development, and the preparation of such plates for attach­ment to the press, but shall not include the making or stripping of negatives,

and further that the sterotypers' collective agreement be amended to incorporate this direc­tion.