SENATE 7617 of H

1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 7617 of H. R. 2135 and 2136, known as the Town zona, through the works of the Gila project, The ·roll was called, and the following send plan; to the Committee on Ways and Arizona, and for other purposes; Senators answered to their names: Means. S. 779. An act relating to the pay and Aiken Hayden Morse 1069. Also, petition of George E. Petty and allowances of officers of the Naval Establish Anderson Hendrickson Murray others, Pierson, Fla., requestiifg passage of ment appointed to permanent grades; Brewster Hill Myers H. R. 2135 and 2136, known as the Townsend · S. 782. An act for the relief of William s. Bricker Hoey Neely plan; to the Committee on Ways and Means. Meany; Bridges Humphrey Robertson 1070. Also, petition of S. D. Foster and S. 948. An act for the relief of Mickey Butler Hunt Russell others, Tampa, Fla., requesting passage of Cain Ives Saltonstall Baine; and Capehart Jenner Schoeppel H. R. 2135 and 2136, known as the Townsend S. 1270. An act to repeal that part of sec Chapman Johnson, Tex. Smith, Maine plan; to the Committee on Ways and Means. tion 3 of the act of June 24, 1926 ( 44 Stat. Cordon Johnston, S. C. Sparkman 1071. Also, petition of American Trucking 767), as amended, and that part of section Donnell Kem Taft Asscciations, Inc., Washington, D. C., pro 13a of the act of June 3, 1916 (39 Stat. 166), Douglas Kerr Taylor testing the nationalization of any phase of as amended, relating to the percentage, in East!and Know land Thomas, Okla. Ecton . Langer Thomas, Utah professional medical serviCe; to the Commit time of peace, of enlisted personnel employed Ellender Lodge Thye tee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. in aviation tactical units of the Navy, Marine Ferguson Long Tobey 1072. Also, petition of Central Wisconsin Corps, and Air Corps,•and for other purposes. Flanders Lucas Tydings Dental Society, Mosinee, Wis., requesting that MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE Frear McClellan Vandenberg the Congress do not enact any legislation George McFarland Watkins containing the principle of compulsory A message from the House of Repre- Gillette McGrath Wherry Graham - McKellar Wiley health insurance; to the Committee on sentatives, by Mr. Swanson, one of its Green McMahon Young Interstate and Foreign Commerce. reading clerks, announced that the House Gurney Maybank had passed the following bills, in which Mr. LUCAS. I announce· that the Sen it requested the concurrence of the a tor from New Mexico [Mr. CHAVEZ], the Senate: Senator from Texas [Mr. CONNALLY], the SENATE H. R. 2021. An act to provide increas·ed Senator from California [Mr. DOWNEY], pensions for widows and children of deceased the Senator from Colorado [Mr. JOHN TuESDA Y, JUNE 14, 1949 members and ·retired members of the Police SON], the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. Department and the Fire Department of the KEFAUVER], the Senator ·from West Vir (Legislative day of Thursday, June 2, Dlstrict of Columbia; 1949) H. R. 2437. An act to amend the act entitled ginia [Mr. KILGORE], the Senator from "An act to fix and regulate the salaries of · Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON], the Sen 'l'he Senate met at 12 o'clock merid teachers, school officers, and other employees ator from Pennsylvania [Mr. MYERS], ian, on the expiration of the recess. of the Board of Education of the District of the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Rev. R. Orman Roberts, D. D., pastor Columbia, and for other purposes," approved O 'MAHONEY], and the Senator from Ken of the Temple Methodist Church, San July 7, 1947; tucky [Mr. WITHER.SJ are detained on offi Francisco, Calif., of!ered the following , H. R. 3038. An act to increase the compen- cial business in meetings of committees prayer: · sation of certain employees of the municipal of the Senate. government of the District of Columbia, and The Senato,. from Arkansas [Mr. FuL- We remember, O God, that in the con for other purposes; ception and birth of this Government H. R. 3368. An act to amend sections 356 BRIGHT] is absent on public business. the founding fathers turned unto Thee and 365 of the act entitled "An act to estab- The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Me- for inspiration and guidance. Thou lish a code of law for the District of Colum- CARRAN] is absent on official business. bia," approved March 3, 1901, to increase the The Senators from Florida [Mr. HOL didst satisfy their hunger and thirst for maximum sum allowable by the court out LAND and Mr. PEPPER] are absent by leave righteousness, wisdom, justice, and lib of the assets of a decedent's estate as a of the Senate on public business. erty. So much so that on this special preferred charge for his or her funeral ex- The Senator from Idaho [Mr. MILLER] day, when we unfurl to the breeze the penses from $600 to $l,OOO; and the. Senator from New .York [Mr. starred and striped symbol of our Na H. R. 3901. An act to increase the salaries tion, our souls thrill, and around the of the judges of the Municipal Court of WAGNER] are necessarily a.bsent. world wistful millions look upon it as Appeals for the District of Columbia and the The Senator from Maryland [Mr. their symbol of hope. Municipal Court for the District of Columbia; O'CoNCJR] is absent on official business, H. R. 4237. An act to amend the act en- having been appointed a delegate to the We lift our hearts in gratttude for all titled "An act to regulate the practice of International Labor Conference at in the past that justifies the quickened optometry in the District of Columbia"; Geneva, Switzerland. · pulse as our flag is raised to the mast H. -R. 4381. An act to provide cumulative The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. head; and we pray, Eternal God, that sick and emergency leave with pay for STENNIS] is absent because of illness. · through Thy continued guidance and our teachers and attendance .officers in the em- Mr. SALTONSTALL. I announce that courageous fallowing succeeding genera ploy of the Board of Education of the Dis- trict of Columbia, and for other purposes; the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. tions, while earnestly exercising their and BALDWIN] and the Senator from New world citizenship, will likewise thrill as H. R. 4408. An act to amend the act ap- . Jersey [Mr. SMITH] are absent because of the emblem flies over this sweet land proved May 27, 1924, entitled "An act to fix illness. of liberty. In the name and spirit of the salaries of officers and members of the The Senator froin Pennsylvania [Mr. Christ we pray. Amen. Metropolitan Police force, United States Park MARTIN] and the Senator from South Police force, and the Fire Department of the Dakota [Mr. MUNDT] are absent by leave THE JOURNAL District of Columbia," so as to grant rights of the Senate. On request of Mr. LucAs, and by unan to members of the United States Park Police imous consent, the reading of the Jour force commensurate with the rights granted · The Senator from Nevada [Mr. MA to members of Metropolitan Police force as · LONE], the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. nal of the proceedings of Monday, June to·time off from duty. McCARTHY] and the Senator from Del- 13, 1949, was dispensed with. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED aware [Mr. WILLIAMS] are detained on . MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT official business. APPROV AL OF BILLS The message also announced that the Speaker pro tempore had affixed his The Senator from Iowa [Mr. HICKEN Messages in writing from the President signature to the enrolled bill (H. R. 1337) LOOPER] and the Senator from Colorado of the United States w·ere communicated to authorize the sale of certain public [Mr. MILLIKIN] are in attendance at a to the Senate by Mr. Miller, one of his lands in Alaska to the Alaska Council of meeting of the Joint Committee on secretaries, and he announced that on Boy Scouts of America for recreation and Atomic Energy. June 13, 1949, the President had ap other public purposes, and it was signed The Senator from Kansas [Mr. REED] proved and signed the fallowing acts: by the Vice President. is detained on official business bcause of attendance at a meeting of the Commit s. 314. An act authorizing the transfer of CALL OF THE ROLL a certain tract of land in the Robinson Re tee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. mount Station to the city of Crawford, Nebr., Mr. LUCAS. I suggest the absence of By order of the Senate, the following and for other purposes; a quorum. announcement is made: S. 690. An act to authorize the furnishing The VICE PRESIDENT. The Secre- The members of the Joint Committee of water to the Yuma auxiliary project, Ari- tary will call tl1e roll. on Atomic Energy are in attendance at 7618 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 14 a meeting of the said committee in con in the United States Supreme Court to ad erans, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Second nection with an investigation of the judicate the respective rights of the States Division Club, Thirty-Second Division affairs of the Atomic Energy Commission. of Arizona, Nevada, and California to the use of the water of the Colorado River; and be it Club, Catholic War Veterans, and The VICE PRESIDENT. A quorum is further AMVETS. The resolution pertains ·to present. Resolved, That the secretary of the senate · the important matter of hospital facili Mr. O'MAHONEY subsequently said: is directed to transmit copies of this resolu ties for the Nation's ex-servicemen, a Mr. President, I should like to announce tion to the President and: Vice President of topic which has been studied by the that at the time of the quorum . ~all this the United States, the Speaker of the House House Appropriations Committee, the morning the Committee on Interior and of Representatives, and to each Senator and House Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Insular Affairs was in session, and the Representative from California in the Con other groups of the Congress. I feel following members of the committee were gress of the United States. that this resolution will be of interest present at the meeting, and unable to PENSIONS TO VETERANS OF WORLD and I ask unanimous consent that it be respond to the quorum call: The Senator WARS I AND II-RESOLUTION OF appropriately referred and printed at from Montana [Mr. MURRAY], the Sena FRANK GREINER POST, NO. 224, NIO- this point in the body of the RECORD. tor from California [Mr. DOWNEY], the BRARA, NEBR. • There being no objection, the resolu Senator from Ari21ona [Mr. McFARLAND], Mr. BUTLER. Mr. President, I pre tion was referred to the Committee on the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. KERR], sent for appropriate reference a resolu Labor and Public Welfare, and ordered the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. BUTLER], tion adopted by Frank Greiner Post, No, to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: the Senator from Colorado [Mr. MILLI 224, of the American Legion, of Nio WAR. VE-TERANS ALLIED COUNCIL, KIN], the Senator from Montana [Mr. brara, Nebr., relating to pensions foi: La Crosse, Wis., June 9, 1949. EcToNi, the Senator from-Nevada [Mr. yeterans of World Wars ;r and II, and I The PRESIDENT OF THE UNI'I'ED STATES, MALONE], the Senator from Utah [Mr. ask unanimous consent that it may bE:l · The White House, WATKINS], and the Senator from Wyo Washington, D. C. printed in the RECORD. MR. PRESIDENT: The following resolution ming EMr. O'MAHoNEYJ. There being no objection, the resolu was accepted with the unanimous approval TRANSACTION OF ROUTINE BUSINESS tion was referred to the Committee on of tlie La Crosse County Allied Council: Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I ask Finance, and ordered to be printed in "Whereas there has .been within the past the RECORD, as follows: few weeks a marked change in the hospital unanimous consent that Senators be per expansion program of the Veterans' Ad mitted to introduce bills and joint reso Whereas a bill has been passed by th~ ministration, which in the opinion of the lutions, present petitions and memorials, House of Representatives and is now pend Allied Council of La Crosse is detrimental to and request permission to have printed ing before the United States Senate provid the best interests of America's war veterans. ing for the payment of pensions to veterans and contrary to laws passed by the Congress in the RECORD routine matters, as though of World Wars I and II upon their reaching the Senate were in the morning hour, of the United States; and the age of 65 years in the sum of. $72 per "Whereas the recent order of the Adminis without debate. month, and whereas it has always been the trator reduces the number of beds by 16,0oo; The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob traditional policy of our country to provide which are vitally needed at this time and jection, it is so ordered. pensions for our soldiers i;n their old age, will be more needed ln the immediate future; which policy we consider to be just and and that in spite of the fact that 30 hos USE OF WATER OF COLORADO RIVER right, and in accordance with the beliefs 01'. JOINT RESOLUTION OF CALIFORNIA pitals have been authorized and under con Washingto:1 and Lincoln, and whereas it ap tract only two VA hospitals have been com ·LEGiSLATURE pears that the total estimated cost of said pleted since the close of the war, though the pensions, to wit, $65,000,000,000, though Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I sounding like big money, is to be spread veteran population bas increased some 15,- 000,000; and present for appropriate reference and over a period of 50 years, and the cost of printing in the RECORD a joint resolution "Whereas powerful organizations are work said pensions for the first year is estimated ing to i:etard if not destroy the accepted hos of the Legislature of the State of Cali to be only $65,000,000, a small amount as Government outlays go today, and whereas pital program of the Veterans' Administra fornia, relating to the use of the water of tion as authorized by Congress and that the the Colorado River. the Government has paid out over $70,000,;. Hoover Committee in its report to Congress 000,000 to foreign nations since the outbreak The joint resolution was referred to recommends the merg,er of the veterans hos of World War II, which is over $5,000,000,000 the Committee on. Interior and Insular more than the entire estimated cost of said pital program with other agencies, which will Mairs, and, under the rule, ordered to pensions, and is preparing to send many bil mean the ccmplete destruction of the VA be printed in the RECORD, as follows: lions of dollars more to foreign nations un hospital program; and . "Whereas a Nation-wide survey of the hos Senate Joint Resolution 32 der the Marshall plan, and whereas we be lieve that the rights of our old soldiers pital situation has been conducted by the Joint resolution relative to Colorado River Allled Council of La Crosse which discloses water should be protected before so much of our money is spent in helping foreigners that that the hospital construction program Whereas more than 3,500,000 inhabitants there will be none left for pensions for our which existed prior to the ordered reduction of this State are dependent upon tl1e <:;olo own veterans in their old age: Therefore of 16,000 beds was in itself inadequate and rado River as a source of supplemental water be it will not meet the hospital needs of America's supply for domestic, agricultural, municipal, war veterans; and and _industrial use; and Resolved by Frank Greiner Post, No. 224, "Whereas that thousands have been denied of the American Legion, located at Niobrara, · Whereas the States of California and Ari hospitalization because of technicalities and Nebr., That our honorable Senators from Ne difficulties iu securing records: Now, there zona have been unable to agree as to their braska, to wit, Senator HUGH BUTLER and respective rights under the Colorado River fore, be it Senator KENNETH WHERRY, should be, and "Resolved, That the Allied Council of La compact and the Boulder Qanyon Project are hereby, respectfully urged to support and Act to the use of the waters of the Colorado Crosse vigorously protest the proposed re vote for the said bill providing for pensions duction of the hospital-bed load as contrary River; and to veterans of World Wars I and II upon to the express desire of the Congr~ss and the Whereas resolutions (S. J. Res. 4 and H. J. their reaching the age of 65 years, and that Res. 3) are now pending before the United pressing need of America's war veterans, and copies of this resolution be sent to each of that the Allied Council of La Crosse mili States Congress which would, if adopted, au said Senators. thorize a suit in the United States Supreme Respectfully, tanlly oppose any merger of the VA hosp.ital Court to determine the respective rights of with other services as recommended by the GEORGE SKOKAN, Hoover Commission as a complete breach of the States of Arizona, Nevada, and California Post Commander. to the use of the water of the Colorado River: faith between this Government and its war FULTON OLSON, time defenders." Now, therefore, be it Post Adjutant. Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate WAR VETERANS ALLIED COUNCIL, HOSPITAL FACILITIES FOR EX-SERVICE JAMES M. GUND, of the State of California, fointly, That the action· taken by this legislature on January MEN-RESOLUTION OF LA CROSSE Secretary, La (Jrosse County. 25, 1949, in adopting Assembly Joint Resolu.; COUNTY (WIS.) WAR VETERANS ALL,IED REPORTS OF COMMITTEES tion No. 10 to memorialize the President and COUNCIL . the Congress of the United States to adopt The following reports of committees Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I have in were submitted: Senate Joint Resolution 4 or House Joint my hand a resolution adopted by the La Resolution 3 is reaffirmed and this legisla~ By Mr. FREAR, from the Committee on ture again respectfully memorializes the Crosse County

MINE PRODUCTION OFF [From the New York Herald Tribune of June been other, more recent, signs. The reas<;in A European recently re.turned from the 10, 1949] for this dist rust is obvious. 'Whether or not great Kailan coal mines in the north told CHINA, A SUMMING VP--III Titoism has emerged among the Chinese this reporter that production fell off almost · (By Stewart Alsop) Communists, the necessary conditions for Titoism are present. 50 percent after the Communists took over. HONG KoNG.-It is time to stop asking There are other reports of the same pattern The Chinese Communists owe nothing to nervously on what terms the west ls to be Russia, which actually used to help Chia~g being repeated elsewhere. allowed to trade with Communist China, as Not enough food and not enough indus Kai-shek. They cannot hope to h ave thell' the Chinese coast businessmen do. The real economic needs satisfied by Russia. They are trial production spells inflation. In Peiping question is, on what terms will Communist the "people's banknote" was officially pegged intensely nationalist, and at least in secret China be allowed to trade with the west? they must resent the ruthless, nineteenth at 80 to the dollar. It has slithered down to And there is every reason to believe that the hardly a tenth of that value. century-style Russian exploit ation of Man Chinese Communists are fully aware of this. churia, Sinkiang, and Mongolia. They have In Shanghai the Communist currency is The difficulties confronting the new rulers their own army and their own secret police. 'reported to have depreciated by half in a of China are already being dramatically un In short, as was the case with Tito, many single day. derlined. The Red Spears are one of the factors tend to divide them from the Krem Inflation begets corruption because honest traditional peasant undergrounds that have, lin, and they have the same freedom as the officials starve. The Communist chieftains for centuries, launched guerrilla war against Yugoslavs to make their own choice. .are believed wholly incorruptible. But cor any· dynasty whose methods became too op BASIC RULE IS GIVEN ruption is already attacking the lower reaches pressive. And now, especially .in Hon~n of the new officialdom. According to one Province, the Red Spears have risen ag_a1n, Using the economic weapon to capitalize ·new reliable first-hand witness, for example, in revolt against Communist food collections on this situation will require the most bril "You can buy your way through Tientsin for the cities. This is but one of many liant improvisation by the west. But there right now, if you've got the money." . symptoms. is one basic rule: The aim must emphati All this does not mean that Commumst cally not be to interfere with Mao Tse-tung's PROBLEM OF INDUSTRIALIZATION organization of China. The sole aim mus:t China is faced with imminent economic col The truth is that the Communist prob lapse, nm· that inflation and corruptio~ have be to promote the western contacts and the even begun to reach the full and hideous lem is in some ways more ditficult than that spirit of Chinese national independence flower they attained in Nationalist China. which has confronted the founders of any which the Kremlin, by its very nature, will Yet an ancient p•·ocess has started, and for new Chinese government since the time of not tolerate. precisely the same reasons that it has always Chin Shih Huang Ti, over 2,000 years ago. It is a curious device to exchange oil; loco started in China: Too many people, too little The Communist movement has been mainly motives, and Diesel engines, sheet steel, and a peasant movement. It was easy to con trucks agairtst Chinese products plus freedom ·food. ciliate the peasants when there were no TO IMITATE RUSSIA of movement in China, freedom of infor urban populations to be fed. But now that mation in China, and a reasonably friendly The central committee of the Chinese has changed. Their movement is also a Communist Party has now announced how attitude of the Chinese Government, But Marxist movement. Consequently, Mao Tse. it can be done. Furthermore, it can prob th·e party means to attack China's economic tung has already raised the banner of in disease-by what amounts to a slavish _imi ably be done successfully and may well pro dustrialization. But that means even more duce major results 1f constant care is taken tation of Russia's 5-year plans. The. whole grinding sacrifices for the ~easantry . '.1'he political and economic emphasis is to be to stress the fact that Chinese independ"" idyllic agrarian period which the Umted ence is all the west desires. . shifted from the peasants to the big-city States State Department observers at Yenan industrial workers. This program bas horri used to describe in language suitable for After all, if western imperialism is Mos fied China's pro-Communist intellectuals, Arcadia, is now over for good. cow's trump card in Asia, there is no reason who like many American intellectuals have why we cannot make Moscow's far more Mao Tse-tung and his comrades hope, brutal imperialism into our trump card. All .fondly imagine(i tnat the Chinese Com however, to escape from the worst of thelr munists were kindly agrarian reformers. we need is the power of organization, the dilemma by trading with the western world. intelligence, and the toughness which, un For it is obvious on the face of it that the To this end, they have already est ablished Communists plan to industrialize China as fortunately, appear to be rather rare com a foreign trade control bureau. Its func modities in Washington at the moment. Russia was industrialized-by the blood and tions is clearly to play one rapacious, profit sweat of peasants. hungry capitalist nation off against the NATIONAL COMMISSION ON INTERGOV- Another fact is obvious on the face of it. other. Thus they expect to hold the whip ERNMENTAL RELATIONS ' Let the peasants sweat until they drop. hand in this dangerous trade-and with Chiria cannot even be started on the way some reason, if the western nations permit Mr. HENDRICKSON. Mr. President, toward an urban industrial economy with 'their policies to be shaped by certain of their yesterday the Committee on Expendi out very extensive trade with the west. business representatives here. · tures in the Executive Departments re Russia can supply no substitute for western If the China coast businessmtin can be ported Senate bill 1946, to establish a trade which built Shanghai from a mud controlled, however, there is an easy way permanent National'Commission on In fl.at t~ the fourth greatest city in the world. out for the west.. The western trading na tergovernmental Relati~ms, cosponsored Moreover, the Communist leaders know it. tions, and especially the United States and by the following: The senior Senator Here the evidence is conclusive. It ranges Britain must reach a firm agreement on from Idaho [Mr. TAYLOR], the junior from semiofficial assurances conveyed to common economic and political objectives in China. They must then set up an interna Senator from Maryland [Mr. O'CoNoRJ, western businessmen in Shanghai to the fact the junior Senator from Ohio [Mr. that the Communists have approached a tional authority, or devise some other great Belgian bank to act as their trading mechanism, to enforce the agreement. If all BRICKER], the junior Senator from Min trade with China, down to the last machine nesota [Mr. HUMPHREY], the junior Sen agent in Hong Kong; from the trade which tool and barrel of fuel oil, is thus brought has already quietly started between Japan ator.from Maine [Mrs. SMITHJ, the jun:.. under control, the whip hand will pass to ior Senator from Louisiana [Mr. LONGJ., and the Communist north to the alacrity the west. with thich Shanghai has been opened to the junior Senator from Kansas [Mr. western shipping.r NEED TO ACT IS URGENT SCHOEPPEL], the junior Senator from REDS SEEK TRADE It is urgent to gain this advantage. The Delaware LMr. FREAR], the junior Sena The Communists mean to trade with the emergency objective of our far eastern policy tor from Connecticut [Mr. BALDWIN], the must be to prevent the catastrophe of the junior Senator from Wyoming [Mr. west simply because they must. Their only communization of all of Asia. The Peiping alternative is a China permanently con radio is already promising material aid and HUNT], the senior Senator from Iowa demned to a subsistence-level agrartan econ moral support to the southeast Asiatic Com [Mr. HrcKENLOOPER], the senior t:ienator omy; too many people and too little food. munist movements. If the west quickly and from Kansas [Mr. REED], the senior Sen This suggests a conclusion worth ponder wisely mobilizes its economic power, it ator from Maine [Mr. BREWSTER], the ing. Only the Chinese Communists can now should be possible to minimize this danger senior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. provide what the western nations desperately rather rapidly. _ SALTONSTALL], the senior Senator from want-a China independent of the Kremlin. But our far eastern policy must also have Minnesota [Mr. THYE], the senior Sena But only the western nations can provide the long-range objective of promoting Chi tor from North Dakota [Mr. LANGER], the what the Chinese Communists desperately nese independence of the Kremlin. There junior Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. · 'want-the wherewlthal, f_rom machine tools are many rumors, but there is no particle of ·and capital to technical skills, to industrialize solid evidence for the existence of Titoism MARTIN], the senior Senator from Ver their country. In considering western policy in the Chinese Communist leadership. In mont [Mr. AIKEN], the senior Senator toward· Communist China, it is wort,h bear any case, the Kremlin mistrusts Mao Tse-tung from New Jersey [Mr. SMITH], the jun ing this fact in mind. For to have what and his group. Li Li-san, Mao's enemy, was ior Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. 'another nation wants ls to be capable of long ago dug out _of his Moscow exile and TOBEY] , the senior Senator from Missouri influencing the policy of that nation. made Viceroy of Manchuria; and there have [Mr. DONNELL], the senior Senator from 7622 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 14 New Hampshire [Mr. BRIDGES], the jun added Federal power or control, these ap tion of State income taxes allowed in com ior Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Mc peared at the time to be good ground for puting net income· for Federal tax purposes. CARTHY], the senior Senator from Dela the step taken, usually because of the diffi INHERITANCE TAXES culty of securing coordinated acti.on by all ware [Mr. WILLIAMS], the senior Senator of the States. This difficulty is character 2. The law of the State in which a citizen from Wisconsin [Mr. WILEY], the junior istic, however, of the democratic process, in lives controls the transfer of his property Senator from New York [Mr. IVES], the which concerted action is slow because of at his death. Hence States have a strong senior Senator from North Carolina [Mr. the differences of opinion as to the need for claim to the inheritance or estate tax, a tax HoEYJ, the senior Senator from Florida action or as to the best procedure to follow. imposed on that transfer. Moreover, the [Mr. PEPPER], and myself. Some functions have been gathered unneces Federal Government was a late arrival in sarily into the Federal jurisdiction through this field, and until the years after World Mr. President, in my humble judgment, War I, had imposed the tax only in time of no more important or worthy legislation an overhasty disregard of the legitimate reasons which some States have had for not war. Congress begari to relinquish the tax has been presented for consideration at acting. It is impossible here to go into the to the States in 1926, by means of an 80-per this session. broad questions of relative administrative cent credit against the Federal tax for State · The purpose of the bill is to establish efficiency and appropriate allocation of func inheritance taxes paid, but the revenue a permanent National Commission on needs of the 1930's led to the imposition of tional responsibility which lie at the root of additional Federal estate taxes not subject Intergovernmental Relations, whose ob the problem. These are matters which will to t:µat credit. Hence at present the over jectives will be to eliniinate·overlapping, require long study and much patience on all lap. is serious, for the National Government duplication, and wasteful costs in the sides for their solution. collects $888,000,000 from estate and gift operations of Government at all levels. One of the suggestions . for mip.imizing ·taxation, and the States a ·total of $187,000,._ In the April edition of the Tax Review, the overlapping of Federal and State taxes 000. Every State save Nevada imposes such ·Roswell Magill, a former Under Secre which is most deserving of consideration is a tax. the separation of tax sources. The separa It is proposed that the National Govern tary of the Treasury and an outstanding tion cf revenue sources means an assignment authority on taxation, has written an ment relinquish the field of inheritance and of certain forms of taxation to Federal and estate taxation to the States. The loss of article entitled "The Tax Scramble," to State jurisdictions, respectively, under an revenue to the Federal Government would .:which bears squarely upon the objectives arrangement w'"" ereby each form of govern not "be very serious·; even in 1948,. this tax of Senate bill 1946. ment will not trespass upon the other's produced on'ly 2'percent of total Federal rev Hoping that this article will be care preserv~s. It aims at termination of the enue. The States have on the whole built fully studied· by every Member of this overlapping taxation of the same item of up adequate systems· f.or administering the ·body, as well as by the Members of the wealth or income or transaction by two or tax, and would benefit materially from being three levels of government. · able to develop it free: from Federal inter House of Representatives, i ask unani Pr!or to the F'irst World War there was in fere~ce. The . pitizen and his beneficiaries mous consent that it b'e inserted at this effect a virtual separation of revenue sources, would gai~ greatly by .the elimination of a; point in the RECORD as part Of my re- interrupted only during periOds of war. ·The troublesome . doubl~ . administration and pay- marks. ·Federal Government was supported mainly meg~ ' · There being no objection, the article by the customs and excise taxes, while the GASOLINE TAXES -was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, State and local governments relied upon property, business, and inheritance taxes, ! 3. The States early enacted gasoline truces .as .fol~ows: ·· with a few early · experiments ·in income as a means of, paying fo_r the highway im THE TAX SCRAMBI,E taxation. There was some, though not provement and construction the automobile (By R?sweu· Magill) much, overlapping of excise taxes. How far made necessary. The tax is frequently cited -as an example of taxation proportionate to The sheer weight. of taxes pressing upon we have moved from this simple condition, and a suggested program for returning the benefits reecived. All the States levy gaso every American today has served to obscure line taxes. The Federal Government in an increasingly critic!l-1 tax problem-disor .relationship to a more sensible basis, are . indicated in this brief summary. · truded into.the field ln.1932, and now derives ganized overlapping of Federal, State, and $560,000,000 from this source (including lu local tax· systems. A citizen of .St. Louis, The following proposals- for distribution bricating oils). At the same time the Federal for instance, pays three· different income ·of taxes are offered, not as an arbitrary de- . Government votes large sums to the states taxes~to his city, to his State, and to his limiting of the areas of taxation, but as a for -highways; in · the current fiscal year, National Government. Elsewhere, purchase suggested ides.1: approach to the problem. Since it ls undesirable to subordinate the $436,000,000 . . of a package of cigarettes involves taxes to · An obv_ioul? sol_ution of this tax overlap, .the three· levels of govermpent. St!ttes to the National Government, or to then, ls for the National qovernment to yield The result of the present situation is that attempt-to coerce them, an attempt has been the gasoline tax. to the States, and, corre few taxes ~re rea.n~ ~eneral, J,n the sense tl_lat made to work out suggestions that by fair-. spondingly,. to yield to the States ··total re they are borne by every citizen. The selec ness and practicality will win voluntary adop sponsibility for highways, through the elimi:. tion of the same tax s.o"tJrce, both by the tion. This is a fielci where even a · good be· ginning _will be extremely helpful. nation of the highway grants in aid. The net States and by the Federal Government, effects on the Federal ~nd State· budgets means that that particular object of taxa In this connection, the follo\J.'.ing program would be S!llall. tion is bearing a double load, while other should not be construed as· one susceptible objects and transactions . and citizens are ·of immediate, complete adoption. It is not RETAIL sALES TAXES bearing none. Consequently, it has · long designed as a pragmatic solution which can 4. The States have come increasingly to been agreed that State and National dupli be readily instituted, but as an ideal goal to rely on retan...,sales taxation as a major source cation of taxation should be reduced and have in mind constantly as the practical. of revenue. Twenty-seven States now levy eliminated as promptly as possible. adjustments are being fitted together in a such a tax, and in 1948 they collected a total The reason for the present critical dupli piecemeal fashio1:1 over an extended period of of $1,478,000.,000: The National Government cation of taxes is plain. Tremendous in time. Just as the present scrambled tax has never _levied a general sales tax, but it creases in National, state, and local budgets, situation has been a long time a.:building, imposes a number. of. burdensome retail-sales which have followed each of the two world so also a proper solution will take time. taxes at high rates, now ge~erally 20 percent. wars, have led to increasing exploitation by INCOME TAXES This field of taxation ought to be left to the States, for they need it, and can administer it each level of government of all available 1. The National Government relies on the sources of revenue. Although the Federal satisfactorily. It is recommended, therefore, income tax for 7:a percent of its total tax that the National Government relinquish to Constitution imposes some restrictions on receipts. It is hard to see how that Govern State aud local taxation, the Constitution the States the field of retail sales and excise ment could possibly finance itself without taxation. does not divide tax sources between the the income tax. The National Government States and the National Government. Such preceded the States (with a few exceptions) ADMISSIONS TAXES division as has existed in the past has rested in the income-tax field. Hence it is appro 5. The Federal tax on admissions and club on comity and tradition, not on agreement priate to request those States that levy an dues was introduced under the Revenue Act or constitutional prohibition. As pressures individual income tax, 31 States and the of 1917. The revenue yield has expanded from for revenue have increased, more and more District of Columbia, to give it up in favor $29,000,000 in fiscal year 1918 to $464,000,000 overlaps of taxes have been enacted, and of the National Government. The States in fiscal year 1948. State amusement taxa steady increases in rates have made the over would lose a total of $1,079,000,000 thereby, tion began with the Connecticut tax of 1921. laps more serious and more inequitable. based on fl.seal 1948 figures. The result Currently, general admissions taxes are found Any program designed to solve the prob would be a notable benefit to the citizen, not in fewer than half of the States, in most lem should begin, ideally, with consideration only in tax dollars saved but in the elimi cases as part of a general sales tax. A num of the proper allocation of functional respon nation of the nuisance of filing two sets of ber of cities are also currently deriving reve sibilities. A complet e solution along these income-tax returns, each with its own pe nue from this source (in a few cases, sub lines is now hardly possible, although some culiar set of requirements, deductions, ex stantial revenue), and there are indications adjustments can be made. The trend since emptions, and rates. of increasing use of this tax at the local level. the Civil War has been toward great er fed To implement this step, the National Gov Withdrawal of the Federal Government eralization. With respect to each case of ernmen·t .ibould repeal the present deduc- from this field is recommended. The reve- 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA 'FE 7623

nue is relatively smal~ (a little more than ,ditional legislation as necessary for their Labor and Public Welfare Committee, 1 percent) in terms of the Federal .budget, own needs, for example, provisions for es will remove 28 provisions from the Taft but the tax could develop into a significant .tablishme:Q..t of State trust funds to hold .Hartley Act. Here is further evidence contributor to State and local revenues. If reserve funds. this source were exclunively available to State The adoption of these proposals would . though none, of course, is needed-of his and local governments, perhaps the present not end all tax overlaps between the National forthright approach to the responsibili . tendency to encroac.h on sources more prop Government and the States but would end ties of his high office. erly Federal, such as the income tax,· would the most troublesome. The gain to the citi And yet, Mr. President, there are those ·be halted. zens affected would be great, primarily in who would distort this brave acknowledg CUSTOMS,· LIQUOR, AND TOBACCO ;the elimination of one of the duplicate sets ment of inadequacy into something quite of 'returns, administrative controversies, and 6. For a long period before World War I, tax payments to which they are. now sub the opposite. · They would make 'it ap the National Government relied for all its jected. The revenue loss to the two govern pear that the author of 28 profound revenue upon customs duties, and excises on ments would be slight, much less in im mistakes has. somehow. demonstrated a liquor and tobacco. Customs are one of the portance than the positive gain to the citizen. wisdom that qualifies him to formulate few taxes expressly reserved to the National Government. Liquor and tobacco taxes Federal and Staie revenue losses involved in the basic national policy on the very sub other than local ucense fees should be re proposed relinquishment of certain revenue ject in which he.has so unhappily, so ex stricted to that Government as well. sources tensively, and so admittedly failed. 'This. Administration by the Federal Government [Based on revenues, fiscal year 1948 (millions) J Mr. President, is truly strange reasoning, -Of such taxes is well organized, and can be more akin to magic than to logic; strange .much more efficiently conducted than by any Revenue Revenue reasoning that would be highly dangerous State administration, since the taxes are col loss to loss to ·were it ever to find acceptance among our lected from the manufacturers at relatively Revenue source Federal State Govern- govern- people and our· lawmakers. few sources. Bqth sets of taxes are very im ment ID:ents portant sources of revenue to tne National I have heard it said, too-by' those who Government ($2,195,000,000 in 1948). The pay but hypocritical lip service to party Tax revenue: . same sources should not also be heavily Individual i.µ.come tax ______------$1, 079 platforms. to catnpaigri pledges. and' to burdened. by the States. Estate and gift tax.------$888 the unequivocal expression Of the Ariieri · CORPORATION TAXES Gasoline and lubricating oils.... 560 -~· ------can people-that platform, pledge, and Retail sales______4.70 ------· 7. The tax{l.tion of corporations doing bus1- Liquor and tobacco.--·--·------·------· 769 people's will can be fulfilled by 28 changes nes8 in tlie· various States· is a tangled web, Admissions and club dues______464. ------'in the ·Taft-Hartley Act. Such cynic!Sm, surmounted by a heavy Federal income tax. Federal unemployment tax...... 205 ------Nontax revenue: Mr. President, insults the intelligence of It is well-established law that States have Federal highway aid.------1 436 our citizenry and vPlgarizes the values the power to prescribe- the terms on which Administrative grants under · ·of our democracy: Repeal is not an elas corporations may do business within their Federal unemp1oY:ment tax.. ... ------67 borders, including a tax for the privilege. tic, abstruse word amenable to 'the' crude Since each State may enact its own tax Total.------·------· 2, 587 ' 2, 3/il techniques of political double tal.\{; · it is formula, there can be and is much over a simple word, with meaning ·ctear and 1 The estimated fiscal year 1949 expenditure of the lapping between the States in taxing trans Public Roads Administration. - in:fieXible. It means annul, abolish~ ' can actions which originate in one State and are Source: Treasury Department and · Department of cel-and the people know its" nieariing. ··completed in another. The situation would .Commerce. They want this law annihilated, not re :· · ·be greatly improved, if the States could be NATIONAt LABOR RELATIONS ACT OF_1949 hashed, polished over, or covered up by a ,·.. induced to adopt a uniform, nonduplicating changed, attractive new-look . . plan for the.taxation of corporations and of The Senate resumed consideration· of . 'transactions that cross State lines. Here is And so, Mr. President, there is plainly a case where 1t would be entirely.legit.imate the bill (S. 249) to diminish the causes no relevance in the "numbers" approach .for Congress to prescribe a plan, since the of labor disputes burdening or obstruct to the basic issue before ·us:..._the issue of power to regulate commerce between the ing interstate and foreign commerce, and repeal. Still, there are many who are in States is vested in -Oongress. for other purposes. trigued by imposing statistics. For these. ·. It is urged, ther~fore, that the Congress Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, on I have taken the trouble to count the enact a statute providing how interstate Friday of last week the·. junior Senator .transactions, and corporations doing busi changes in the WaiJner Act effected by ness in more than one State, shall be taxed. from Minnesota was discussing the his the Taft-Hartley Act, and I find that A great amount of needless paper work, con torical background of Iabor .. management there are 100 such changes. Thus even troversy, and confusion can thereby be elim relations, and the efforts on the part of ' by this standard the Taft amendments inated with no necessary loss of revenue at the Federal Government to legislate in retain the bulk of the Taft-Hartley Act- e.ll. that particularly important field of in 72· of the original 100 changes, about UNEMPLOYMENT TAXES dustrial relations. I began my discussion .three-f9urths of all its provisions. 8. The effect of the title IX in the original by consideration of the labor movement . I repeat, however, that issues like the Social Security Act was to force the States even as far back as 1792, with the v"ery one we are debating-issues that turn to establish syl[!tems of unemployment com first unions that were organized in this on our fundamental concepts of justice pensation. Since th4; purpose has been ac country. From that point I carried on up complished, the ~tates should be freed to and morality-are not illumined by that finance as well as to administer their sys through the nineteenth century the ex kind of mathematical formula. We do tems 'dn the basis of' their own legislation. periences of the labor movement under not measure justice-we dispense or · Th~ current effect of the Federal unem the common law_, and the experiences of withhold it in toto. We do not com .ploymen t tax is to net the Federal Govern the labor movement as it had suffered promise morality--:-we practice or scoff it. ment about $135,000,000 a year. This ~s the under the impact of injunction and court The question we face is one of principle difference ''between Federal receipts, which orders. I brought to the attention of the not figures and statistics. represent one-tenth of the 3-percent pay Senate such devices for pitting the com roll tax levied by the act, and Federal ex The distinguished Senator from Ohio, penditures in the form of grants to the munity against labor as the infamous in the course of his remarks on June 8. States for their administration of these pro Mohawk Valley f ormul.a. I pointed out stated: in some detail the efforts which had been grams. The Federal Gov~rnment is also We retain in our substitute the essential holding in trust for each State (under sec made on the part of employers in the principles of the Taft-Hartley Act. tion 904 of the Social Security Act), an in 1930's to break up what we may term creasingly large reserve of the excesses of successful, sound, and constructive union Tr.at, Mr. President, fairly and pre 'Unemployment tax collections over the bene organizations. Today I wish to direct my cisely poses the issue. Shall we perpet fits paid. The total of these State accounts is now well over $8,000,000,000. Since each remarks primarily to the Taft-Hartley uate the principles of the Taft-Hartley State deposits to and withdraws from its Act, and to the amendments proposed by Act or shall we return to the principles own reserve, the function of the Federal Gov the Senator from Ohio [Mr. TAFT]. of the Wagner Act? ernment in the process is merely that of a THE TAFT-HARTLEY ACT AND THE TAFT I have already, in the course of my re central bank. AMENDMENTS marks last Friday, shown that these prin The States should be given complete au ciples are mutually exclusive, that the thority to finance and to operate their own Mr. President, the able Senator from unemployment-compensation systems. The Ohio has stated that the substitutes for philosophy of Taft-Jiartley is irrecon ' Federal Unemployment Tax Act and section the Thomas bill. which he has advanced cilably antagonistic to that of Wagner 904 of the Social Security Act should be re on behalf of himself and two of our Re and equally antagonistic both to the con ' pealed. The States should enact such ad- publican minority colleagues on the tinued health of our economy and to our .7624 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 14 most cherished concepts of freedom and 1935, but to destroy the legal props of of winning gains for its members while main democracy. American trade-unionism and to restore taining peaceful relations with employers. · It is now my purpose to address my the old condition of complete and un While it is not my custom to quote the self to some of the salient provisions of conscionable inequality. Chicago Tribune, I feel compelled to the Taft-Hartley Act which would sur UNION SECURITY refer to its editorial of November 22, 1947, vive the Taft amendments and which The Taft-Hartley Act entirely pro which describes the peaceful relations epitomize its essential principles. hibits an agreement between an em which had existed between the newspa Preliminarily, however, I should like ployer and a union for a closed shop. per and the typographical union prior to emphasize a crucial fact which has Before a union can obtain even what the to the Taft-Hartley Act: been overlooked by many and deliber act calls a union shop it must be au In 1852, the Chicago Tribune entered into ately obscured by some. I refer, Mr. thorized to do so by a majority of all the contractual relationships with the Chicago President, to the completely false basis employees eligible to vote. This was Typographical Union, No. 16, which has con on which the Taft-Hartley law was very capably and well pointed out by the tinued until this day, without interruption presented to our people. The American distinguished junior Senator from Illi of so much as an hour. • • • We regret publ.ic, through one of the most subtle, that this record, as a matter of great pride nois [Mr. DOUGLAS] last week. The to us as well as to the union, has now been expensive, and effective propoganda union shop atiords more illusory than interrupted: • • • campaigns in our history, was led to real security. Under the Taft-Hartley When the law was under discussion in believe that new legislation was neces Act the union can require the discharge Congress, as our readers will recall, we ad ·sary merely to remove the excesses of of a worker only for failure to pay dues. vised against outlawing the closed shop. We the Wagner Act. The people were told It has no defense against the infiltration did so, among other reasons, because we that the Wagner Act was a good thing, of subversives, disrupters, stooges, spies, "know that the closed shop worked well in · that its basic objectives must ba con provocateurs, gangsters-names and our plant and had worked well for a half tinued, but that, like most new social century or more. titles which have all too often been used Congress did not take our advice. legislation, it had created its own ex against the labor movement. The Tribune hopes that the present dif cesses and its own problems. Hence, Even more important, it gives the em ficulties will be resolved speedily. the argument ran, the Congress, after ployer unfettered freedom to hire in the Mr. President, I should like also to 12 years of experience under that stat open market, which is to say, it gives to ute, should resolve those problems and quote from the hearings before the sub antilabor- employers the full opp(>rtunity committee of the Committee on Edu remove those excesses. · to man their shops with antiunion work The success of that propaganda is not cation and Labor of the House of Rep ers able and anxious to undermine union resentatives, where Mr. John O'Keefe, difficult to understand. It made its ap conditions and the union itself. peal to the traditional fair-mindedness secretary to the Chicago Newspaper Pub of Americans. Unhappily, however, 'that The Taft amendments make only the lishers Association, testified on Decem slightest concessions to union security. ber ·-22, 1947. Representative Kersten great American attribute was crudely Under the amendments an employer c·an exploited by those whose own , sense of was asking the questions. . I quote the notify the union of job openings and the following from the testimony: fairness leaves so very much to be de union can refer qualified applicants for sired. employment. That does not mean that Mr. KERSTEN. Up until -now .and for a great The real thrust of Taft-Hartley, its many year~ past you had a closed-shop agre~ true objective, · was not to redress a the employer needs to employ them. ment, didn't you? real or fancied unbalance created in Under the Taft amendments, the dis Mr. O 'KEEFE. ~es; we did. 1935, but, rather, to rob the American credited union-shop authorization elec Mr. KERSTEN. How did that feature work worker and his union of every major tion would be eliminated and unions out in your previous contracts, so far as your would be permitted to require the dis closed-shop provision of the contract was legal victory laboriously achieved in the concerned? preceding 50 years. The National Asso charge of employees for engaging in wildcat strikes or for being affiliated with Mr. O'KEEFE. We never even discussed it. ciation of Manufacturers was not anx It had been there for years and it has re ious to return to 1935. It nostalgically the Communist Party. Still retained, however, is the absolute prohibition of mained there. desired and effectively attained a return Mr. KERSTEN. Did you have any real diffi to the dark ages of- industrial history the closed shop and the provisions for culty with it, so far as your union (the ITU) when there was a master who imperi de-authorization· elections and those is concerned? ously commanded and a servant who making State antiunion security laws Mr. O'KEEFE. We did ·not • • • as · a meekly obeyed, when the very thought paramount to the Federal law.· matter of fact most of the Chicago pub of a labor organization was unspeakably One of the predictions made by oppo lishers, or all of the Chicago publishers, I nents of the Taft-Hartley Act at the time would say, would prefer to continue a closed evil and when the fact of a trade-union shop ·if it were legal. was condemned and punished as a crim of its passage was that the outlawing of the closed shop would disrupt long-estab Mr. KERSTEN. The reason for that ls that inal conspiracy. this particular union has been a long-term Let me briefly document that asser lished and voluntarily maintained union institution that has a certain amount of tion. Tue Wagner Act of 1935 did not security agreements which have been tradition behind it, a considerable amount, abolish the labor injunction. That was mutually beneficial to management and and it is a responsible union, and under those abolished in 1932, after 50 years of con labor for many years. This prediction conditions a closed shop ,has worked out so tinuous agitation and political· support has been borne out in several important far as the Chicago publishers -are conc~rned, by both major parties. industries, particularly the printing in is that right? dustry. The closed shop has been the Mr. O'KEEFE. Yes; it has. The Wagner Act did not grant to labor 1 the right to boycott. That basic right practice in this industry for almost 100 The experience ·of the International was achieved only after years of distress years. The International Typographical Typographical Union under the Taft ing litigation, culminating in the wide Union, which had attained full growth Hartley Act is the outstanding example spread acceptance by the judiciary that long before 1935, even long before the of the disruptive effects of the Taft working men and women, like other Wagner Act, is universally recognized as Hartley closed..:shop prohibition. The groups in our society, have a natural a model, responsible union. In fact, Mr. typographical union has been subjected right to come to the aid of their fellows President, in an issue of the Reader's to 18 charges, 9 complaints, 1 injunction and to refuse to contribute to their own Digest of about 2 years ago, this union suit, 1 contempt action, and 2 damage ultimate destruction or injury. was painted not only as the model union suits. Yet this is the same union that The closed shop was not the liberal of the Nation but as a model for all 2 years ago was haHed as the finest union gift of a generous Congress in 1935; it unions all over the world. Its democ in the world; this is the same union that was an institution of· many years stand racy was upheld and was -proclaimed; had a record o-f labor-management-peace ing and proved constructive value, an and its efficiency· and effectiveness, both second to none, the same uniort which institution whose legality was almost· to the employer and to the employee, was looked upon as one of the most re universally accepted long before 1935. are well documented. The majority re sponsible and one of the most honorable And so, too, With other provisions of port of the Joint Committee on Labor and effective unions in the world. Yet Taft-Hartley: It is clear that' the ·essen Management Relations stated: "under the Taft-Hartley Act, which has tial effort was n-ot to equalize rights The International Typographical Union has as its theoretical purpose the promotion rendered unequal by the Congress in long enjoyed public_confidence by its record of union-management -peace and the -im- 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 7625 provement of relations between employer tive, but I wonder whether those who jobs do not pay enough. The jobs they and employee and the development of an talk about "the right to work". are· will want are in places where the workers amicable, friendly atmosphere for labor ing to have the right to ·work without have organized a union and obtained management relationships,· we find that discrimination because of race, color, or better conditions. They want a union the typographical union has .been sub creed? Are they Willing to adopt a full man's job, which has been made possible jected, as I have said, to la charges, 9 employment bill on the part of the Con by men who have paid dues in order to complaints, 1 injunction suit, 1 contempt gress as a national policy which will see obtain good working conditions. action, and 2 damage suits, and has been to it that every individual in the Nation · Mr. HUMPHREY. I do recognize that forced to participate in 8 strikes, and has does have the right to work at a job of the observation of the Senator from been compelled to spend more than $11,- his own choosing, at wages which provide Louisiana is one of real merit, and refers 000,000 to resist the attacks upon its him with a decent standard of living? to a situation which has prevailed in security. Unless that is accomplished, the phrase many States. I think we need to know Too many have failed to recognize the "the right to work" is meaningless and that the principle of the right to work is importance of union security to the empty. The obvious fact is that "the based upon a productive, solvent, pros maintenance of stable labor relations. right to work" is meaningless and is perous economy. Men had the right fo · The impact of the Taft-Hartley Act empty, without a job on which to work. work in 1932. Th.ere was plenty o'f "the and the Taft amendments on union se The major drive of almost every labor right to work," but there were no jobs on curity is further aggravated by those organization in this country is to obtain which to work. Men have the right to provisions· which permit more restrictive jobs for its present and future members, work fn 1949, and yet 3, 700,000 people find State laws to prevail over the Federal to resist the blind rush of employers to no jobs on which to work. So really what statute. The result is that employers cash in on quick profits by wholesale dis we are getting down to is this: Here is a and unions in interstate industries are charges, artificial cut-backs in produc slogan which has been used against the governed qy conflicting rules in the dif tion, and other devices that keep profits unions by the very same people who ferent ·states where they operate. A up and wages down. We are going fought the 40-liour week, who fought multiplicity of standards applicable to through some of that now. There are time-and-a-half payment for overtime, these empioyers and unions is hardly 3,700,000 Americans who want the right who fought the elimination of child lab'or, conducive to stability in labor relations. to work. I mean they want a job on who fought fair labor standards, and.; Mr. Particularly when American industry which to work, which makes the right to President, who in fact even fought the has its plants and its processing firms lo work meaningful. These Americans social-security program. cated all over the Nation, and when have been laid off, their names taken off My predecessor iri this body was one of great industry is negotiating with large the industrial pay rolls, by some of those the leading champions of the "right to unions in the same type of production who today are talking the loudest about work" principle. On May 12, 1947: in_the process, it is of the utmost importance the right of every American to work. course of debate on behalf of provisloris that there be a uniformity of standards. The truth is that those who sermonize of the Taft-Hartley Act designed to elim If we are to have a labor policy which is on the sacred "right to work" really are inate union security, he stated: national in scope, rather than 48 differ thinking of the sacred right to starve. Mr. President, I think that that is the re~l ent labor policies, it behooves us to sup The truth is that the very unions who magna carta- plant any State laws which seek to regu exhaust their energy and ingenuity in late or prohibit union security· agree maintaining work. are accused of Ref erring .to the right. to work- ments in interstate industries in a man f eather-.bedding practices and sometimes for the American working men .and .women. ner inconsistent with whatever policy even worse. I object to the whole basis of compulsory we may establish. Either Congress Mr. President, when the unions asked membership, but I think the bill- · should establish a uniform Federal policy for a 40-hour week, in order to spread Namely, the Taft-Hartley bill- in this admittedly Federal field or we the work, these great proponents of the is largely going to eliminate compulsory should leave the entire matter of labor right to work were not in· favor of it. membership unless the union leadership is legislation to the States-either one or When the unions say, "Because of so good that a majority of all the employees the other. mechanization, we ought to have a 30- want it and will get out and vote for it in a Mr. President, a word about the tactics hour week, 80 jobs may be available to secret election. Obviously the union lead ers-and I heard one of them the other night employed by those who seek to legislate the American people," the proponents make his major argument against this pro the closed shop out of existence. Many or.the right to work say, "Well,.that goes vision-are quite sure that a majority of of them-not all-parade as the high too far, that is too extensive; we cannot the employees are not going to want it minded def enders of the individual, un go that far." So, the right to work does and I agree with them. So this provision, organized worker, and cloak themselves not seem to mean very much. Likewise in my opinion, is far more the magna carta with the noble, attractive slogan of "the when unions have fought for the right of American working men and women than right to work." I say, Mr. President, of time-and-a-half for overtime as a pen is the present so-called Wagner Act. that I know of nothing more revoltingly alty, which is a type of penalty payment The st1ttistics of the National Labor sanctimonious on the American scene so as to spread out the work for full-time Relations Board, Mr. Presrdent, demon today. One look behind the cloak w1ll employees, there has been bitter resist strate that my predecessor had never show that these pretenders to such ance. been more wrong than when he made touching solicitude for the unpro~ected Mr. LONG. Mr. President, will the the above statement. These · statistics worker are the same forces who have bit Senator at that point yield for a show that in the secret elections referred terly resisted and sometimes blocked question? to, unions won 98.2 percent of the elec every social or legislative movement de The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the tions, and 84 percent of the eligible vot signed to improve the lot of the Ameri Senator from Minnesota yield to the ers voted in favor of the union shop per can worker, farmer, and small-business Senator from Louisiana? mitted by the act. man. Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, will the Let us carefully analyze the full signifi Mr. LONG. I wonder if the Senator Senator yield? cance of that slogan, "the right to work." has seen some of the methods used to What does the "right to work" really promote the "right to work"? I know in The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the mean? Are those who so noisily pro my own State legislature people Who were Senator from . Minnesota yield to the claim its desirability prepared to go the actually financing the "right to work" bill Senator from Ohio? whole way? Are they prepared to lay and seeking its enactment did not testify Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. down a great national policy not only before the committee. They brought in Mr. TAFT. Of course, our contention of the right to work but of jobs on which pool-hall loafers who said in effect they has aJways been that the union security to work? Are they prepared to call on were trying to find jobs, and could not get furnished by -the act, the union shop the C.ongress or on the various State jobs. At the same time, all over the which the men voted for, is adequate legislatures . to guarantee . that every State there were hanging ·out ''help union security. It is an absolute guard able-bodied citizen shall have a job-a wanted'' signs offering jobs which these of union security, and, of course, the · job of his own choosing? men would·not take. When we really get fact that the men voted for it is rather Everyone of course will admit. that full to -the facts, the reason they do not take in its support than in its opposition, I employment is a worthy national objec- the jobs that are available is because the should suppose. ·coNGRESSiONAr; ttECOnD-SENATE Ju:frn 14 Mr. HUMPHREY. I should like to Mr. HUMPHREY. To delude the Certainly if the Taft-Hartley law can say make the observation to one of the au- American people into believing that un- a State cannot have a closed shop, even thors of the Taft-Hartley Act that the der the Wagner Act the same thing .was i{ the State wants it, then the Thomas evidence was replete, and the. authors done as has been done under. the Taft- bill can go in the opposite direction and should have known about it before it was Hartley Act. provide that if a State does not want it, ever written into the act, that 98.2 per- Mr. TAF.r. What I wanted to point it must have it anyway. What is good cent of the elections were crystal clear out was that while the Wagner Act au- for the goose is good for the-gander; if it proof of what the workers wanted, and thorized the closed shop, it took no posi- . works in one way, it works in the other had the authors of the act listened to tion whatever-- . way. I do not see that there is any rea- _labor instead of listening to some ,of the Mr. HUMPHREY. As we have ma- son why it cannot be done. ·people they listened to, we would not tured through experience, we say we Mr. HUMPHREY. I am very grateful have had unnecessary governmental ex- should take a position, for the same to tbe Senator from Louisiana. penditures connected with these long reason that we have a national policy on Not only was there prohibition against elections, where 84 percent of the voters social security, a national policy on fair the closed shop, but it wa~ proyided that _who were eligible to vote voted for uni-on ·labor standards, a national policy in -any State Jaw which was more restric- security. reference to the control of narcotics, a tive, more arbitrary, would 'be the law Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, will the national policy with reference to taxes. insofar. as labor-management relation- Senator yield further? I may say to the distinguished Senator ships were concerned. This great friend Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. from Ohio that, in the absence of Fed- of labor said, "If you -can find us a law Mr. TAFT. · .I guite agree. I -have eral law for the control of narcot.ics, that i·s; worse, we wHl ·make it the law never disagreed with that. But the act State laws would be upheld. The reason of the land.!' That is what the Taft- was a compromise, and most of the Sen- -why the Wagner Act did not legislate Hartley Act said. We say we are going . ators, or a majority of the Senators felt in this field was because at that particu- to legislate in a.field in which we· should that.the men ought to ,vote pn that ques- lar tiJIIe it was felt it was not necessary; legislate, and not permit workers to be tion themselves, and. I yielded to that but the record of today proves it is placed under the impact of a law which persuasion. However, the Senator.l_sup- necessary. . . ·is given respecfability,c< if we can call it pose is familiar with the fact that under Mr. TAF.r. Does tbe Senator from that, by the Taft .~Hartley Act,,by saying the regulati-ons of· the State laws, and Minnesota agree with. the following con-. to the state legislatures, "Pass -the most under the Wagner Act itself, the supreme clusion of Mr. Brandeis, quoted by Mr. iniquitou~ piece of legislation you can Court of the United States by a v.ote, Justice Fr~nk!urter in January of this find, {f y-0u can- do· worse· than we did. as I recall, of 8 to 1, held that State .Year: ·which i& a job in itself, and we will make laws prohibiting union shops were 'per- , The objections, legal, economic, and social, · · it the law of ·the land." That is not a f ectly leg'al under the Wagner Act. - Is· against the closed shop are so strong, and . principle which promotes friendly rela- . not that a fact? the ideas o! the closed shop so antagonJstic tio~hips. I think it clearly sets forth M HUMPHREY Th ·u i S to the American spirit, that the insistence th tt"t ~ h h r. ' e J nor en- upon it has been ~a s-erious obstacle· to union . e a 1 Uue W ie was prevalent when ator from Minnesota is very familiar the 'Taft-Hartley. Act ·was placed· upon with that. Under the Wagner Act tlier~ prcgre~s. .. , -the book'.s. · · · was no legislation pertaining to State Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. ·President, will IN.JUNCTIONS · • ·• laws. Where there is an absence of leg- the Senator yield? Mr. President, I desire now to .refer to . islation, of course the Sl.lpreme Court Mr. HUMPHREY .. I.yield. that very great-and c.ontroversial issue . rules . that the States' action . prevails. . Mr. DOUGLAS. Is the Senator from ·knowh as the .injunction. ·-But the Supreme Court has also ruled, Minnesota aware that some time after :· 'In 1932 the use"-of injunctions in labor and it is clear and conclusive constitu- Justt.ce Brandeis wrote this statement he. : (iis'putes was, at least so it was thoug.ht, tional-law, that in the:field of interstate :acted as the impartial arbitrator for ·the · , · commerce the Federal Government;can _women's Clothing Industry in New ·York .'effectively laid "to rest by the No:i;ris-La::. ~ 1 egislate. _"wl1at .we are doing in the .City, and in that capacity he obtained'.the Guardia.Act. As s.tated - b# ~tlie Supieine ,. . ·court in. the' case 'of ·Milk Wagon Driver5 : 'Ilhomas bill.' is to Jeg.islat~ within· a .c'onsent of.both the union and . th~ - em- ~un1 ori - against take- Valley Farm ·Prod.: . fielcl -which is constitutional: wµich be'- -players to .. a 'pr..ef erential ·uµion -shop, ucts, that act -was tbe culminatieh ·of a "lpngs to 'the. Gongress . . ·The Suprem-:C .namely, that .the union :Would first -refer ' bitter PO.l.itioal, ·social, arid econoirifo can- . Court will uphold the right of the Con- , candtdat.es for employment, to the . em- , ~ trovers-y extending~ over thalf -a centUPy . . gress to legislate in that par,ticular field. ·player, a;nd he ; would take .them, and 'In . 1947 , .that · c6ntfover· SY.~ was-=quite . . -Mr. TAFT. Is the Senator also. , fa- that only after th-e submissi_on of unlcih - · ·, . · , - . . unnecessarily ana quite recklesslw:.;..tully . miliarr with the gene.r.al attitu.de taken, .members to the emplQyer had; been. ex:- revived . by.· t1ie' ~aft-HartleY. '.A.€f. . !ft, . for example~ b.y,Mr,;_Justice Branpeis and ~ htlusted and .tne1.. firm. -still . needed~ em;.; · ·other words~ that greaf man.date on· the. ."t • -, ., Mr. Justice Ftankfurter; paFticularly ·as .ployees,, were .eJilployers permitted to , ·n the de. cision by Mr. Justic'e take nonunion employees? Is he fur-. ·part:of the Congress to tfie working·peo' reflected l . ple of AnieriCa,. the· Norris-ITaGu'ardia ·Frankfurter, in upholding the State laws .ther. familiar with the fact that this 'Act, passed under tlie a'dminlstration of . _prohibiting the closed shop_? · . . . union. preferential shop, over a period ;a Republican President, has been tlirown . Mr. -HUMPHREY. -The junior 1;3en:- .of t.ime, has become . virtually a closed . a tor from Minnesota is familiar with the shop, and that Brandeis was its father.? , asiQ.e. One of the authors- of",tliat. a~t ·comments ·of the late Jus'iice-·Brandeis , Mr. HUMPliREy: IAm.. very ·w1wreci- :was· Ge'orge-w.: 1\rorris) =the great', verier- and-of. JustiCe-F:rankf.urter: 'lie-is aISo ·: a~iYe . fpr __ th~t.. h!stQr~cal.. obser~ation. ~abl~ ~~~~ -·~~~ tJ:~h~itwest, ~h~h·\i{0~~e~ ' , ·' . ·~ ful!Y fa~!}iy - ~.itl\ : th.~ __. f.aci, ~h~_ _t ·.ti:ie OnlY recently the National • · Plar1n~g -so. ar. m ·,j _s · a~y .er •.; a!1 · ~ 9 ~r . Congress· of. tl}..e -United States- has the _CQmmissio!l ~ ~ .whi@ r~wes.ents "indUiStry . was. that g_r~~t ~u~a~ita_na~, ~hat g_!,eat\ ·. riO:ht, urid~. r J;~e ·,:' co, nsti.tut_'!on_·.-,~_'o,f.:,t. n.·.e _· ang l.abpt "ip a · N~w York Times arti_cte. _m~yor ~~ ~.' fJW :~ork q_tty ._ Fi~}"el~a . H. - ..,. ·· ~ · · - · - -~ ~ ~ . . . b h h · -LaGuard1a!(' They had the kind . of a United States, to legish}.te in .t~~ . fi~-14 of issued i!l t:µe Ill?n't.lt Of Fe ~~~~TY, . w , 1.c. 'pfil1osopnf wlircfr 'this country . needs~ interstate commerce,. asd he is no't ,gQ,ing . wa~. intrqdµced ·1p. eyidence. m th.e . hear- not tne philosophy of the Taft~mirtley· to permit either himself or the public ·-ings, pointed out that the patten.i .of the . to ·be deluded into .believing that because closed shop in -th~ g1,mnent industry was ·law, but the philosophy of .understand the Supr.,em,e pourt, un.de,r th.~ .Wa,.rt ner · ~ model_patlte_rn in the United States, an~ ing, .of frietjdship-, and of peace: · ~ th tit sh Id b t d · f · I kn-Ow, 'M:r.-President, thatrthe-: Taft-·, -_Act;_, upheld .$tate. - ~~s. - ppder .t.hJ~ bi~l a . - ou . e _res ore as a . me~m.s ~- -Har"t·I:;.y· a·po1.,._g·1··s·t,., w1·11· t"·ke"·e".xc· eption 'to. the same thing will be dohe; or that that _good, sound labo~-management relation- ·" .ru · ~ ... should be the principle. Without any ship. that statement. They have repeatedly express affirmation on the. part' of the . . Mr. . LO~G. _Mr. Preside_nt, will the asserted a vast distinction between the· Federal Congress, the Supreme Court u:P- Senator yield _for a question? . pre:...Norris-LaGu.ardia and the · post- held the constitutionality of State laws. Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Taft-Hartley injunction. They say that Distinguished lawyers in this body know Mr. LONG. I certainly hope that Norris-LaGuardia put an end to private that, and they should not delude the neither the Senator nor anyone e!s~ _ is ·employer injunctions but did not touch American people. · · · confused regarding the right of Congress Gov.ernment injunctions, and tl:..at Taft- ·..Mr. TAFT. I do not quite i:trideistand .to legislate Jn the.fteld of the closed shop, Hartley_con'tin'.ires·the s~me sc~e:rµe : _But the Sen.ator's statement 'ori that point. · " insofar as it affects interstate commerce. they are wrong, woefuJly wrong. -r·. 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 7627 I think it is apropos, Mr. President, to abuses inherent in labor . injunctions. Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield to the Sen- say that the wolf changes its fur, but That is a normal timetable of Repub- ator from Illinois. it never changes its mind. I submit that lican backwardness. Mr. DOUGLAS. Is it not a fact that we can change some of the titles, but A flood of legislative proposals was in- in the Wilkerson injunction the union the same old principle and the same old traduced and discussed in Congress. As officials were prohibited from communi philosophy are there. The Taft-Hartley Justice Brandeis observed, "These legis- eating with their members? Act philosophy is that of the pre-Norris lative proposals occupied the attention Mr. HUMPHREY. The injunction LaGuardia era, the philosophy of bitter of Congress during every session but one was so sweeping that for all practical ness, of injunction, of inequity, the phi in the 20 years between 1894 and 1914." purposes it put the unions into com- losophy which was repudiated by farmer At long last, in 1914, Congress enacted plete, total silence and inactivity. I President Hooyer and repudiated by the the Clayton Act, which was described by dare say hardly any injunction has been Congress in 1932; a philosophy repu President Wilson as "a veritable eman- so sweeping. That is why labor fears diated by both the Republican and Demo- cipation of the workingmen of America," injunctions. This is not a theoretical , cratic Parties, until one of them got and was bailed by Samuel Gompers as discussion, to be conducted in the elass hooked in with the Taft-Hartley Act by "the industrial magna cart a upon which room. This is a part of the life of labor some strange quirk. Both political par the working people will rear their con- ing men. They know what it means to ties were opposed to government by in struction of industrial freedom." But have suffered from the injunction, junction, until 1947, and then the keeper the hopes thus engenderc.d proved wholly whether it is obtained from an em of the keys, the NAM, walked back in, illusory. They were completely frus- player going to the district court, or by opened the doors, and took over. trated by the interpretation placed by Government.- Nothing .is more demonstrably certain the courts on the Clayton 'Act. Even stronger, Mr. President, was the than that the Congress in 1932 deliber Inevitably, the failure of the Clayton published -criticism of Professor-now eratively terminated the power of the Act ·to; accomplish its plain purposes re- Mr. Justice-Frankfurter, who is recog Government to obtain labor injunctions. newed, with even greater force, the agi- nized as one of the leading authoritibs on ' Why this purposeful action by Con tation against injunctions in labor dis- the labor injunction, and who · was gr~ss? For the all sufficient-the excel: putes. Beginning with the Sixty-sixth heavily relied upon by Congress in enact lent-reason that some of the most out Congress, numerous bills seeking to off:- ing the Norris-LaGuardia Act. · rageous abuses of the labor injunctim;i set the crippiing effects of the decisions He wrote-see his work entitled "Law were perpetrated in c~ses instituted by of the Supteme Court were introduced. and ~olitics," at page 218: the Government: These eventuated in the Norris-LaGuar.: Never in American history has an appeal b~ This should be good doctrine for ma~y dia Act of 1932. And throughout that the Goverment to the courts • • • been folks. There are aiways people worry period, up to and including the Congres- received with such widespread condemnatiorl ing· for fear the Government is going to sional debates and committee reports on as the injunction granted to Attorney Gen regiment us, there are always _ people Norris-LaGuardia, the injunction against era! Daugherty at Chicago. Critici.Sm does worrying for fear the Government is Debs obtained bJ the Government con- not fl.Qate with time nor with refiection. : .. going to socialize us. I know of no bet The simple truth is that Hal'ry M. Daug;b.er- . tinued, in the words .of one representa- ty • • ~ wit~ _the compl~city - of J':ldg~ . ter way of being socialized than having tive active in the debate as "the' cause Wilkerson, has set.hiJ:p.self above the qonsti an injunction applied to us. We are celebre from wl;lich sprang·the agitatfon tution, · • • . • What's t~e Constitution really-under the·control of th·e Govern- to destroy the power of the Federal bet~e~n frienti.s-=-even . though one of them ment then. · · ~ - · · ·· ' · courts to issue· such-labor-injunc.:. happens 1 to be the Attorney General bf the Those who are worrying about the tions." ' ' · United States and the other a Federal juage. Government going to socialize somebody Let us no~ delude ourselve~; the Con~ Small wonder, Mr. President, in . the becaU.Se it. is going to help the farmer gress thr-0ugh the many years, from 1894 face of that background, in the face of the with· a little price support, are the same on, argued year in and year out fo'r tl).e congressional debates, and in the face of people who woulcollective bargaining; we mean unity of interest throughout the union, and may be brought without regard to the that, 1u refusing to work on materials which amount in controversy or to .·diversity of labor and management sitting down to threatened it, the union was only refusing to the citizenship of the parties. gether to evaluate their joint experience aid in destroying itself. · and, with the application of reason and Doubts have been expressed by some of good will, working out together their The persistence on the part of the ma the lawyers who appeared before the joint problems. The Taft-Hartley law committee as to the constitutionality of jority of the Court to perpetuate a repu complet~ly v,iolates those elem~mtarY. (liated doctrine arolliied the just ~resent making a breach of a labor agreeinent· principles: It imposes'· lawyers, the ment of the country. In -1932 Congress subject to suit in Federal courts, regard-' Labor Board, and the Federal courts as responded with · the Norris-LaGuardia less of the amount involved or the di what I believe to be unwelcome guests Act, which completely adopted the rea versity of citizenship of the parties in at every collective;..bargaining table. It soning and philosophy of the Holmes volved. Not being a lawyer, I shall not takes from the persons most intimately Brandeis dissents. This time the victory attempt to discuss this phase. But there affected, the actual parties· to the rela was complete-at least until -June 23, are·more than sufficient other reasons to tionship, every opportunity to exercise 1947. · No longer did the Supreme Court object to these provisions. As Mr. Wil their own ipgenriity in meeting their have difficulty in· recognizing and enforc liam H. Davis said in his testimony own difficulties. In a word, it complete ing the elementary right of workers to before the committee: ly demolishes the natural, organic de protect their status and conditions by re I do not know whether it is unconstitu velopment which is collective bargain fusing to·work on nonunion goods. The tional or not . . I think it is wholly unneces ~ ing, and substitutes· in its place ·what is, Court's repudiation of the old doctrine sary and I am against it. I think it is uncon at best, a dangerous form of paternal-· was ·complete and unqualified. ! stitutional. I am sure it is un-American; istfo statism. -- In the Apex case the Court declared: and it is unnecessary, and altogether, i:p. my opinion, ~n a vengeful spirit. Mr. President, the next pqrtion of my An ·elimination 'of competition ·based on remarks pertain to the Conciliation differences in labor standards is the objective · I can think of no.' provision. which has· of any national labor organization. Service. I realize that the Senator from· less place in a labor-relations statute Oregon has ottered- an amendment to In the Tho.rnhill.case the Court stated: than one which facilitates and encour disassociate the Conciliation Service The health of the present generati.on and ages labor and management to look to the from the Department of Labor. But I of those as yet unborn may depend· on these cojfrts to settle their grievances. Sound believe, in order to conserve time, I shalf matters and the practices in a single factory labor relations require that employers ask that this portion of my remarks be may have economic repercussions upon a live in good faith with their employees.· incorporated in ·the RECORD as a printed whole region. Lawsuits obviously are not a means of statement in the context of my address.: And in the Swing case the entire Court achieving such industrial relations. This The PRESIDING OFFICER. The' agreed that- · has been well stated by an authority in Senator under.stand$, of course, that it Interdependence· of economic interests of this field, and I should like to quote him: will be printed in small type. all engaged in the same industry has become It would be unfortunate if there should Mr. HUMPHREY. I understand. a commonplace. develop any strong tendency to look to the Federal courts to settle questions concern The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without· In the language of some of our out ing the interpretation and application of objection, it is so ordered. standing Supreme Court justices, then, collective-bargaining agreements. A collec Mr. TAFT. Do I correctly understand the Taft-Hartley Act, by outlawing all tive agreement is most workable when it is that the Senator is in agreement with boycotts and subjecting those who en treated as a constitutional instrument or· the ·amendment offered by the Senator· basic statute charging an administrative au from Oregon? · gage in them to injunctions, to cease thority with the day-to-day ·application of and desist orders by the Board, and to general aims. The determination of dis Mr. HUMPHREY. I wa& just getting extensive damage suits in the Federal putes arising during this process is more a ready to inform Senators what the junior courts, has ignored a commonplace, has matter of creafang new law than of constru Senator from Minnesota's position wa·s shown a careless disregard for the health ing the provisions of a tightly drawn docu on the matter of conciliation servic~; of the present generation, has destroyed ment. Few judges are equipped for this task· and, since we have had a question a"Qout the necessary objective of any national by experience or insight; in addition, they it, I will read it instead of having it would be hampered by the restrictions and merely printed in the. RECORD. labor organization, and has created an delays of legal doctrine and court proce illstrument for imposing restraints upon dure. Wider voluntary use of arbitratron CONCILIATION ._SERVICE . , labor which reminds one of involuntary offers a more promising· method of settling The concillation or mediation ser.vices servitude. such disputes. (Cox, Some Aspects of ,the of the Government, Mr. President, raise. Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will Labor-Management Relations Act, 1Q47; 51 Harv. L. Rev. 1274305.) , another point ·or issue under the Taft the Senator yield for an inquiry at that Hartley Act:· Until 1947 these · services point? The Thomas bill proceeds on the basis were in the Department of Labor. They Mr. HUMPHREY. I do not have much suggested by Mr. Cox, nameJy the en had been· there for 30 to 40 years. So more to read, and then I shall gladly couragement of the parties to resort to far as I have been able to ascertain from yield to the Senator from California, the peaceful negotiations and arbitration to sifting the recent testimony before the. Senator from New York, and to any other settle disputes. The Taft amendments, Senate Committee on Labor and Public Senator who wishes to continue to debate on the other hand, retain these punitive· Welfare, this Service has functioned ef on this issue. legalistic provisions but would place them f,ectively in the Department of Labor I say, Mr. President, that the l~giti in title I as the National Labor Rela-' during this entire period. mate boycott must be restored if we are tlons Act, a particularly - incongruous As all of us know, however, the Coh not to invite economic chaos. Let us not, place for them in view of the policy ex-. cili~tion Service was nevertheless wiped as the Taft-Hartley Act does, encourage pressed in its first section of "encourag out by the Taft-Hartley Act and re-ere-. large-scale migrations to low-wage areas. illg the practice and procedure- of col- ated .as an intjependent agency of the Let us not revive the ugly misery of the lective· bargaining." · Government. · · · · - · · 1 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 7633

I may say, ~ President, that this that the Conciliation Service be returned of the present independent agency, than was done de~!te tne labor-management to the Department of Labor? does the Senator from Oregon with re c9Jl'ferene-es which had been held,, which Mr. HUMPHREY. I said that after 2 spect to the Department of Labor. We .approved in principle the Conciliation years of independent operation of the are, however, directly and seriously con Service being a part of ·the Department Mediation Service, the Commission on cerned on the merits with the question of Labor. That was one of . the few Organization of the Executive Branch of of how to run our Government in the things on which labor and management the Government, the Hoover Commis best possible manner in the public in agreed upon. They agreed that it would sion, has, after prolonged and detailed terest. It is an obvious principle of or be best to leave the Conciliation Service study, established with the greatest good ganization, Mr. President, that functions in the Department of Labor. But the sense a fundamental principle that inde must be grouped under responsible lead Taft-Hartley Act made it an independent pendent agencies of the Government ers who in turn are directly responsible agency. This was done, then, presum should be sheltered within major execu to the Chief Executive. If we scatter ably, because some employers and some tive departments reporting to the Presi and divide these functions and create of my distinguished colleagues consid dent through the appropriate Cabinet many leaders, we will, and in many cases ered the Conciliation Service a partial officer. already have, placed impossible burdens agency of Government-partial toward Mr. TAFT. The Senator has not an of direction, coordination, and guidance labor because the Service was in the De swered my question. I asked the Senator upon the President. partment of Labor and responsible to a whether he said the Hoover Commission Last fall we had a maritime: strike in · Cabinet officer, the Secretary of Labor. · recommended that the Conciliation which one of the chief obstacles to peace Yet to my knowledge th~re was no re Service be returned to the Department ful settlement was a l!Uestion of so liable evidence-no concrete facts-no of Labor. called clock overtime under the Fair history of abuse or mismanagement to Mr. HUMPHREY. I repeat, that after Labor Standards Act, administered in. support this legislative action. long and detailed study, the Hoover Com the Department of Labor. The Director Now, after 2 years of independent op mission has established with the greatest of Mediation and Conciliation asked the eration of the mediation service, the good sense the fundamental principle Secretary of Labor to arrange for such Commission on Organization of the Ex that independent agencies of the Gov assurances to the parties. as would ef ecutive Branch of the Government, the ernment should be sheltered within fectively settle this issue. These as so-called Hoover Commission, has, after major executive departments reporting surances were given and as a result the prolonged and detailed study, estab to the President through the appropriate strike was .settled. The Secretary of lished with the greatest good sense a Cabinet officer. I am happy to present Labor is not responsible to the Director fundamental principle that independent that part of the Hoover Commission Re of Mediation and Conciliation and the . agencies of the Government should be. port .for the RECORD : Director is not responsible to the Secre :;;heltered within major executive depart The question has been raised as to the tary. Here was an important wage issue ments reporting to the President through restoration of the Federal Mediation and in the labor field in which .two inde the appropriate Cabinet officer. ·conciliation Service to the Department, and pendent agencies of the Government placing in the Department, for housekeeping were involved, and yet neither could le- · In spite of this sound recommenda purposes, the National Mediation Eoard, tion, some distinguished Members of the which deals with labor disputes involving rail gally command the cooperation of the Senate continue to advocate the in and air carriers, and the National Labor Re other. dependence of conciliation services. lations Board. Our objective, Mr. President, is to pre Among these distinguished Senators is The Congress is engaged in revising labor vent such situations from arising in our my friend, the very capable and able policies which will affect some of these &gen Government to the embarrassment of Senator from Oregon [Mr. MORSEL cies. The Commission can make no recom officials and to the detriment of the pub During debate la.st week he said inde mendations as to their organization until lic interest. It is our sincere desire to pendence was required because some em these questions are settled. improve the services of Government ployers still felt that these services would GENERAL COMMENT through proper organization. The Con be partial if performed through the De In general, it can be said that the Depart ciliation Service needed and utilized partment of Labor. He emphasized, ment of Labor has lost much of its signifi while it was in the Department of Labor however, his conviction that none of the cance antl should have restored to it the the various services and facilities which many agencies we have here recommended. officials of the Department of Labor are This would make for greater efficiency in the the Department of Labor possesses in the partial and, if I interpret his remarks Government. field of Government labor functions. correctly, that they are impartial public These include, to cite some examples, servants of highest competence. At the Mr. TAFT. Is it the Senator's opinion information and assistance on labor laws, same time, he has called for proof that that they departed from this funda statistical research, employment and ap the present service pas been anything mental principle in cases where they felt prenticeship problems, and on the em but impartial in any of its operations. there should be independent action? ployment of women. These services be As I understand him, it appears to me Mr. HUMPHREY. I think the Sena come immediately available for the pre that the able Senator from Oregon feels tor from Ohio is familiar with the fact vention or settlement of disputes where that the record of the 2 years is suf that they did not depart from it. the Conciliation Service is in the Depart ficiently good to justify the continuation Mr. TAFT. My recollection is that ment of Labor. Where the dispute is to of the Conciliation Service as an inde they did. For that reason I asked the be settled by an independent agency, pendent agency. I know that the Sena Senator from Minnesota. however, all of these services are avail tor from Oregon wants an impartiar · Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator from able at sufferance. agency, and if I could have revealed to Minnesota was very careful to point out There has been a lot of talk, Mr. Presi me any facts which would cause me to that the fundamental principle has been dent, about what employers think con believe that the Conciliation Service as established. cerning the impartiality of the Depart a part of the Department of Labor would The United States Conciliation Serv ment of Labor. This is presented as the become a partial or a biased agency, I, ice was abolished as an arm of the De crux of the argument by the able Sena too, would join with him in declaring for partm{!nt of Labor without any proof tor from Oregon. He has expressed the its 'independence; but in view of what whatever of partiality. It was given an opinion that there is something special the labor-management conference pro independent status in complete disre about conciliation which requires pri claimed-and in view of what the Hoover gard for established principles of gov mary consideration to be given not to the Commission has already stated,.it is my ernmental administration. · It appears true facts of the situation but to the mis considered judgment that we would be to me that the more agencies we can put conception of some groups. I submit, wise to strengthen the Department of b...i.ck under department heads, the bet Mr. President, with all respect for the Labor by returning to it the Conciliation ter government we shall have in terms Senator from Oregon, for whom I have Service. of proper governmental functioning. the highest respect, that misconceptions Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, will the The Thomas bill would reestablish the provide an unsound basis for legislation. Senator yield? Conciliation Service in the Department I am sure, and I believe that the facts Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. of Labor squarely upon the grounds of will bear me out, that some employers Mr. TAFT. Did the Senator say· that governmental efficiency. We ma~e no think that the Wage and Hour Division the Hoover Commission recommended- more contention of partiality on the part. and the Bureau of Labor Statistics should 7~34 · CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENAT·E not be in the Department of Labor be-, that the .atmosphere of free collective about the tremendons. amount of steel, cause these employers regard the•Depart bargaining can be reestablished without and ·the automobiles, .refrtgerat1Jrs, tele· ment of Labor as a partial agency. It having suffered any .permanent damage phones, clothing, and everything else· we may be that some of ,the Senators equally from.the irresponsible experiment of the produce, and while we are boasting about believe that because these agenctes serve past 2 years. our production, while our n·ational econ or affect employers every step should be Yes, Mr. President, let us ·go back to omy goes well over the $200,000,000,000 taken to allay the fears of these employ the .fundamentals of the Wagner Act mark, while profits skyrocket, w ~1ile the ers by creating additional independent which included the tenets of the Norris..: country is busy at work, one would thinK agencies. I do not, and I am confident LaGuardia Act. Then we can eliminate when he reads the newspapers, at times, that a major.ity _of the Senators. do ho.t from the picture the unfair and inequi or hears some of the orators who are share this view. It· was, however, this table tool of the injunction which all too propohents of the Ta.ft-Hartley Act, that very philosophy, thisllntoward deference often has been used in an ex parte every worker in America wa::> on strike. . to the thoughts of employers, which manner. I think the record is pretty clear, in a caused the Eightieth- Gongress to strip · Labor relations under the Wagner Act nation which has had the production we the Department of Labor of -its functions were better handled by far than they have· ·enjoyed since 1940, in a . nation and fun(is. . . are at present, or than they would -be which has had the record of production I know the Senator. from Oregon is under the Taft amendments. we have had· since 1945, the end of the sincere wheh he say_s on, this floor that To those who unduly fear that unions war, that ·American workers have beeri he is a friend of the Department of La will hurt our · economy-as they have - hard· at work. The fact ·is -that in· the bor and wishes to" see its functions re':' never done- before-I- reply by quoting days when th.e workers were supposed to built. He says, however, that this should from a book which is the basic economic be ·abusing their power; 'in 1946,~ corpo..: not be done through reestablishing the text of· the prophet ·. of free enterp.rise, rate.wealth in this country had net profits Conciliation Service in the Department Adam Smith. In book I,· chapter 8, o~ which ·were unprecedented up to that of Labor. There are other Senators, per The Wealth of Nations, Smith, writing time, far beyond anything- ever kno:Wn. haps, who, when tbe issue arises. _may · in ·the yea1: our independence was· estab • As ·I pointed out through the charts I take a similar stand with respect to other lished, stated:· J Used on ·Friday, the-number of_ strilces; functions sought b~ more .effectively io, We rarely hear . • • • of the comb~ per c.~n:t ~ ge"Yi;:;e ; after Wpr.lq)Var ii,. Twl!~ discharged :through _the Department of· riations of ~ m ~sters·, tho~gli . freq~entl~ . p less than after World War I. I · have 1 Lab.or:. If we ta~e- counsel of such reser those of v,rorkµi.e,n. But wh9ever rm_agm~s. oef ore me now a chart of real net. weekly vations, .Mr .. :Presl~len.t~ .. solely upon the. upon this account, that masters rarely com earnings 'bf -workers, and they are down I bine, is as ignorant of· the world as of the basis of 0 what employers may think, from 1944" and down from !945. . subJect. Masters are always and every.where. ven:v. .~mlleh feair. that the public ·interest · ·~ The. potrit is ttiat during th.e ·war th~ alone'.wni.. sWtel". : : . . - - iu· _a sort of tacij;, }?ut co,ns~a~t and \l~lform combin~tion n_ot to raise th~ ~~ges 9f· labor; American wo'tker did not make riches. _· For these sotind r.easons, Mr. President, 1 When the. .war ., was' over many. of tneni I am corivinced·in the merits of the need_ • • • To violate this combination is to carry out the sp_ecifl.c provisio_ns of the everyw}?-ere a. most unpopular 'acti9~. !!Jtd a w.~e . ~isl'r!-isse~ _temp.brarilY; ~ ma\lY. -Of ~ort of reproach. tc;> a master a~ong h~s tbe.m ~ h1:1,d to spend their. Ufe's sayings, Democratic : platform. PY restoring the neighbors and equals. • • • Masters too which had been · invested in war bonds. ·. Concilia,tion Service to the Department. somet~mes enter into particular·combinati'ons . Wa_ges never did 'catch· up "with :prices, of Lapor. to sink the wages of labor. • • ~ .• _: - -, and the workers got restless . ... But bfg _ Such . coro~imttions, however, are :tre C_ON.CLUSION business said, .':We bave doh~ ·quite ·~V(.e1l q1.. 11~~ply resisted· by !l,contrary d.et~ns.ive com-, Mr. President,. l "now come to my- con-· bination_ of the workmen, .who s0metimesJ · ?turing the.. war. 'J?erh~ps we '. can· have clusions. - , ' t_oo, w~thout_ any provQcation. pf \J.ii~. kind; - a show-down:: . 'l'.hat w.as'because· never First. The Taft-Hartley- law was de combine of thelr own : a.c~ord t_o raise_ t® ., fri : t~e · hi~ toi:y,.. pf this- ~country ,had- so · signed -to meet a danger that did not · price of the!r~ lab,Of . . The.Ir' usual _pi:etenses l ipuch, m:on.~y : been . made -by so~ few _as exist: The ·W-agner- Act was s·uccesstul ;: are som'etimes the high price of provisions; was mad}:! from 1940 to: 1946. -Never in it was · operating~ sati:;ifactorily; no basjc~ so'ziietimes.; the ·g.rea t profit Which ·tliefr-·mis- : £be ·-history, of the worlcj was · so' much i-ers make by their works'. ' But-whether i:hei! need for chang-e 'was neede~. ' - · i combinations be offensive ·or de:fensive/:they · ~oney m.a~e :t>y · ~o few~ . Never in"the Second. The ·Taft-Hartle-y law dfd riot are always abunaantly.hearcl of. In order to hU;tory ~· of t.p-e ·y.ior ld Md ~ so f~w ·com.; produce the results_ its· authors claimed bring the poJnt -to a speed-y · de~!s~on, tp._e·i t>anies ~aht'rolled the. economic 'destiny for it. It did not create industrial peace. have always recou;rse to the loudest clamor, of so ,tnany.'. .. · · · - · It did not put labor and management. and sometimes to the most shocking vlo- · ~· Mr. LONG . . Mr:· President, ' Will' tlie 0 on an equal footing. It did not pfevent fence, and' outrage. Thel are despe;rat.e, .ahd Senator yftld? . . . __.__ -- . national emer.gencies: · nor~ did' it settle ~ . act ,. .. - • • • (to) ·. • · • .• ~rlght~_n th_eir . ~:- Mr; - HIJMPHREY. ·ry1eld . . ~ . . ' any.' :. It-did aet 'even .;-prevent m~sters into ~,an immedia~e · compliance with· pre =- com_-· the'fr demands. · · .. -Mr. 'Looa. "was "iiot" £hat -a.ii ·icteai munists frani r·eceiving collective bar time to' come aiong with Tlie R'uml plan: gaining recognition, as witness tlie fact The masters upon these occasio~ a;-e just as. clamorous_upon the otb~r side and nev.er ~n.,a .. !orget. _; :µ>C?tlt three-f~~rtlis ~ qf · ~ · that an open . Commun~st ,can ·'disavow' cease to call aloud for the asSist-ance . of the, year's ·taxes? , , his party·affiliations one day and fil~ am-. cWil ' m~gistra~e. aii~ ~he r!go~ous · i:;xec~!ion ;. . Mr: HUMPHREY. · u seemed to.. work davits permitting him to come before the of those laws which have been enacted with way .. PQ!n so ·'muctl severitf . against combin·atlons of i~t:Y .zfoieh -tl!a t , ~ )«.am ~ -~sf ~ ; National Labor -Relations Board the next· ing out -tha.t there w:as :- n-0 -~ su·ch great day. ; ~ , ~ ·- "•- - ~ · ' · ' · ·· ', • • . ~ lab?r~rs · and Jo.urneymen::. . . :. ~ . n~Jional -~at'wtrophea§ · ne~e§iit~te~ftll!s " Third. The. Taft-Hartley law did sue-· One ·of the gr~at . authoriti~$ .I ·_: hay~ a}?rupt d~Dar.rture .~ f:t:OlJ.l ': th'.e · P.a~ter~l ~,~f ceed in ~ -creating .. industrial relations cited before, .Dr. . Willi~m M. Leiserspn; laJ>Qr.;-.ma.n~~megts{lips, ; .. lit~.r.gllY . Jl.C'\lt~ chaos: Relationships- :satisfactory for aker citing the' j,.uiragraphs ~ . haye:.re.~q. many y_earsJwci'e qestroyed: : Same sat t_l_i.ng .t_beJ,}asJc:law o~ tllis lapd.. ..aPcl tpQY~ warned us against changing the Wag~er- ,·{ng .Pell::ru~ll Jnto , sQtn.ethi}lg els.e ..v·, isfactor-y-relationships·were able to con Act·: .He s~.i:d :· . _- ~ . -.· . tinue by under-tlie;_table deals· for tacit · : I _appeal .to the American· people, -.and . a'Voidahce · of· tlie law.- · · Li,ke Adam Smith, however, we m11st not ask them if the. sam.e. peopl.e who .were be misled l?Y the cla~or of those wlio have Fourth. For the firsttime in our peace beatir.ig the,tom-toms for_the T.aft-Ha:rt~ been masters. The picture is. not. as dark as ley. Act .we.re. not the very same .:peopl~ time history the Government has ·been they paint. it. No employer has goiie.·to.. jai{ embroilecf in the substance of collective for violating ·t:ge La.bot: Relations ·Act, but· who .wer-e 'iriaking-theif.mil1ions -and.Jlil-.. bargaining. · As r' have 'indicated, the workers are ·still going to jail for their un libns; the' same peopfo ~ who .f orceci the . place of the Government in the collective fair labor practices, for disorderly conduct discontinuance of any. type of pric·e con- .' bargaining process ·is ·to create a fEJ;vor in connection with ·strikes, for mass picket trol; at the very time -when inflation -was able atmosphere and to protect the rights ing, as well as for the violence they resol'.t to threatening. - I ask if ,they were not the .. of the parties rather than to tell those in desperate' etiorts -to' bring their disputes to very same people who .have had very parties what tbey may agree to and what a speedy d~~i~io11. much their- own way in .the economic pie- . they may not agree to: ·: . . I have often thought about how dark is· ture from 1946 to !94~: . ~ . ~-- . The· fallure · is obvious. Our d.uty is the picture: -· Here we. are in this country Mf. President,· the· time has come f-or plain. we must -go · back to the funda boasting about. our· grea~ prodiiction...:... a consideration of :fhese thin,.gs, and I mentals -0f the Wagrief Act with the hope and we have great production-boasting think-it is a little bit overc}ue. 1949· CONGRESSIONAb RECORD-SENATE 7635 What is necessary in order to build a was that the union movement had liter- said the other day, it is when the people sound labor relations policy, in addition ally been destroyed. The number_- o-f are off guard that we can best judge to reinstating the spirit of the Wagner members of the unions had been reduced them,,not when they are on guard. Act, is fairly simple: We must give the from 5,000,000 in 1919 to less than 2,000,- America needs to speak for h.er people. working people in the United States a 000 in 1930. With the destruction of the She needs the spoken word which comes standard of living which they deserve in union movement wages went down. It not merely from the lips, but from the view of our productive ..capacity. The was not prices that went ·down, 'but wages living example of her experiences. Ta-ft-Hartley law -was passed because went down. These are ·facts. Farm in-- I conclude by asking, Would not a there were .many strikes in 1946 after come .went down. Mortgages increased. labor~relations policy be better directed price control was repealed. I want to Interest rates remained high. A hand- toward raising real wages back to their add, that the profits then were the great- ful of people took a lot of people to the earlier level rather than · artificially· est in the history of the country. cleaners. That is the record. clamping down on the rights ·of the For the life of me I cannot see why It was not necessary for that to have people who struck in retaliation aga.inst so ·manrplain ordinary people were de~ happened. I submit .that a strong farm the economic blows they suffered in 1946? nied the information, or; let me say, movemel,l.t. and a strong labor movement Certainly they struck in 1946. Some em wete not concerned with the information at that time could have combated the ployers tried to tell the American people as: to what was happening in the .eco- powerful vested interests in .this country. that if they had to pay 5 cents an hour nomic life of America. Concentration · And now we are on the move. But, Mr. · more they would be bankrupt. They. of· business? We have· never known President; the same folks who attaclced_ were guilty of a deliberate falseho6d. In anything like it, Mr. Ptesil!ent. ·w ·e have · the labor movement in 1:946 were attack- 1946 net profits after taxes were $12,800-,.: had mergers, interlocking directorates, ing the cooperative movement by 1947. 000,000; . in 1947, $17,300,000,000, after bigger and bigger business, and all the Th~ farmpendix· of the.··REcottn: to tJie· effect junior Senator from Minnesota that the... -' up. any more. So sopie day it is neqe~-: that Gener::).!" Motors had· appl{ed to· the welfare of this ceuntry is .pretty- much sary to watch out for these,cooperatiyes, Securities and Exchange Coihin1ssiori for .

dependent upon the· purchasing· power of J ·too. _- But they did not ·quite ·get that .. the privilege of . distributin·g· 'a "$20;000;..: the ._A.merican people. · I like': to ;-try to : done-2 years ago, Mr. Pre~ideFlt, becal:lse , 000 cash bonus plus ~ a . $2Q,OOO,OOO" st'ock'' put first things~ first: People coffi~ , before· ; the fapl}er is: a IJ!etty rug'ged individual. 'bohus".'among ' its .. directors arid top· caPital. I tfiink that a people whic}l -is at ·, He.. was at· o_ne- _t1me ·left ~!most ragged. ·. executives? ' : · '· · ., · ' · work a people that will buy, a"peop1e ::: No.-w he is rugged. He fought back-. ' , Mr. HYiv.rPf-IREY: · r ·a.rri very happy '. that' is: productive; a- people that pro.:.t Th!Jse eng9{_ged in the·.farm:a:nct the l_abor· to teceivetha:t infdrm:atio:h. - I .know:'that · duces efficiently ff a people which pro- · movement are standing shoulder to there are those who have all sdrts of Eluees '. weaith. 'I am c.Jnvinced most shoulder fighting for its rights right now. information along that line. I recall people think as I · do· ib. that respect. _ ." Mr. P1:esident, who are· th~se high and that when I was a student.. 1 Y,ear. be- . Mr. President I· am one who believes mighty people who ·· think· th,ere is any- fore the City National Bank of New York that this Nation' is as strong-=.not as ~the ·, thing Jn thi~ · country · beside~ ·_ th'o~e who .closed its, cfoofs-;- I read that it· had 'Cu.s.- · :. ... C~ase >Natio_nal B~nk, ;nqt as.. "tne-:Sto~lt -'. really PJ:"Oduce; the ~~!1 . ~eo ·._w,o:rk.,in .tl].~ ·- .'·- ~. ri~µted ·µiiflions "of ·,do}Jars )J:.1 'Qo:1;1uses mark.et, not even. as :the great: pc;>-werf'ql: _::; sh9p~, iJ.1. th,e factOF)~s. Qn~ .t.J:!!:! f~.rJilS? .~. amon_g: it.s ·..Q.i .re'Ctors . .. 'A ' little 'later. .W ;. cor!Joratioris, b_ut t:~ie ;Natio_ri.~ i-s -on:Jy :~S · _'· Tl{e_y· .ar-e the pr;oduc~rs_. · : :B-qsm~s~ . ca:n- : c1ea~red the 'Amerl-ca:n peeple o~t .of mil'.." strong as the· pr-0ductivity, the· uiteHi-- J !lot. continue unl~ss peQple have _ ~Ul::fhas- _.., ltoqs of do1Jars of,d:eposits.;;b\.lt,,' after ali.- ., gence, th·e -liealth,. and the .edu:Catmn.-Of'_·.: m~ -power.- ?-:heir rights are basic right~. ·' th-e-direct-ors bad their fun. · · , · its .peo:Ple-andi, ..f -repeat, 'of its·: people. ':.. ar~~ fu:µda~enta-1 rigJ.:its, ·and oome '·Ew~n WI:iat Htm trying to pol.nt ouf iS that I believe that if we put 'more emphasis -- bet.ore· the '.iJr-i~peges_ Gf those OJ:! tOP.; " : the way-to·preserve a free ecemomy and upon the human element -we: will take. th~se_ in th~ hig,her b~~c~ets : ; _.. · ·· · _ a fFee-e.nterprise- system· is ·to ~ preserve car.e of .the financi.al element. · _ .: .. l ·repeJitt, · thi~ ·Nati.on is_ only- as .§trong - the -opportunity -for men ~ and women fo · Mr . .President: it-is people .wno today ::'.as '. its ~ working people, ·its fa!:mers_, .it.s earn a ·liv-lng. We have found that that are _ reb.uilding Europ~ ' M!tI)Y~ ,of- ' its.--: · craftsmen~ its. skilled workers, whose boY.s , opportunity can . best ·be ·preserved buildings were blown all.to p~ces~ {Many· ·:-- ,an~- gif.~ :peed=h,oi;n~s. :n~ed perk cpops, · tme-tigh drga:~ti-0rrs pf.:'their· own__.:.co of '"its. banks' were tlestroyed: Many oI .need' crothes .. •They- ar~ the· people who operatives, unions, ~nd . trade assocla its· railroads.were destroyed. But if theF-e · m~ke , Am·erica s~rong . . ~f we eyer forget tions at "lbcal, district, and State levels. are people left·who are free, and il they -·· tl!!'tt and -attempt to enac,t punitiv.e le~is- We are talk-ing about· trying-to preserve can be~ome ,happy peqple, they .·will' re- ~ lation again~t· tpem, tll~n Vfe sh~1l h!lve . the kind, of. economy. whi<'.,h · ma}:ces it bulld the destroyed r~iltoatls; .they .. 'will .. 101?~ our. Americ~n herit~ge. , . ,. . , ppssjble .for .the American people to '.be' . re~uil.d'. the destroy~d . b~i_ldin~-s ail'~ -~aci- - I. appeal to ~enators - ~.oday to .remem- - self-sustreining and self.-respecting. . tori~s » ';['Jle.free peop~ will do taat. ~ , ber that when we . con~1qer ~a]Jor-man- Would '1t not be better, then, to · raise Mr. President, too many· t1m'esrm:tbis :, · ageµi~n. t · ~elatJ9,nships _ we :- are ·~ot . Qon.,.. the minimum ,wage, for example; to 75 - " ··:· t ~I country.'.· .we- have ~ beez;i . ·fooled ·-bY ' the::> siqering thein m.erel'y -wjthin tl;u~ bQr~e.r:~ :· cents an: J;iottr : so.- ~'S to,,gi-ve. some measure ·.. ' ·, :·· g<;>l.den .g~ow of tl,l~ J.?ai.nt~~ .. domes' 6-f-.; of ~ tQ.e ·Upited States. , The . ~y~·s _of· the: · o~ securit'y to'.:the ·1;.md~fPr~vile'gecl, wlt.11 '.:- ; _;· · .·" · high. pnv1lege. 1.Too many times we ~ have .. wqrld. a:re- fiieed .upop_u .s . .. T.he· peo-p~e - of ~ Ol).t ·whose ec.ono~1c rfr.eedom: none· Of -us .~: 11 ~ ~ been 'fooled ' into' b'elievin·~- ufat' bec·ause- - other ·rouritries -want- to-kn9\v whether . is ' Secure? .. 'The · same Congress ,·which" - .: so· nianY people were wealthy tlle people ·· this great America is concerned about · found the tifue'to enact"t-he'Ta'ft'.. Piartl-ey· · of the country were strong. I remember people or about .tne golden calf. _I am law did not ftnd' time to le.arir wlia:t· was· . in .1-929-we -were tola that everything was · one of tho.se who believe tI:iat we li~erally happening to the cost. of .living. It diil _ in· go.od. condition .. . W.hy· were we told :: imPr.ove. Ql!r sit1.:l~tion _t):IrqugI:iout the not find tiine to lea:m Wh'at _.w,as happen---· : that? Because conditions were go-od in ~ wqrld and win·the battl!':!-for m~n·s i.ninqs _ ing .to>tj:iose.wbo w..ere w.orlcing under ~~: · Wall StrE.-et. Because conditions - were when we recognize th.at ·plain, ordinary minimum wage of 40 or 50 cents an good witJ:i the coupon clippers. Because people everywhere are interested in our hour. The same Congress which saw fit conditions were good on the stock· mar- humanitarian :accomplishments. - to ·reliuce taxe·s on the high, the mighty. · ket:- But; conditions were not good· back Sometimes 'I .thirik that what.we need · an.ct· the ·tich did-not iind time to raise in the Dakotas or Montana. Conditions in America is a little greater sense of hu- the l~vel of the unorganized workers. were not good in Ohio or in Tennessee ·or mility, a sense of ordinary, common, hu- I have seen many tears shed over the in Louisiana. . . : mane. decency. We are wa.tched for the unorganized workers. I will belieye some W.bat; happened to the pe.opJe? Well,- little .thingskwe .do: As the' distinguished of the taik I hear .about I.ove f-o.r the un one thing that,.,happened, Mi;.. .Presidentf - Senator. from Illinois [Mr. , DOUGLAS] ( organized workers. when ~ the · Congress . ·xcv--481 7636 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 14

~ees fit to enact a minimum wage which own standards, and to equalize the situa the tide• itself; and just as surely as we is fit for a hum~n 'being. If any Mem tion in the light of economic realities. are here in the Senate Chamber today, ber of Congress can tell me how he can The question of obtaining a satisfac if we fail to do our duty in 1949, there· live on 50 cents an hour, I want to see tory labor-relations policy, therefore, is will be some of us who will be back here him, but soon. broader than the question of the Labor to do our duty in 1951, and I would not All these questions are a part of a Relations Act itself. I have gone to the be surprised if there were new faces here single pattern. We should not consider large cities of America and have looked then, because the American people, the legislation piece by piece, and say, "Is over the slum areas. I have said to my working people of this country, the peo not this a fine bill?" Let us find out self, "I wonder who lives there." I find ple who have been oppressed by this law, how it stands up alongside other things. that many of those who live there work are determined that they are going to What about the effect of the Taft in factories. They may work in one of remove this kind of punitive legislation Hartley Act upon labor? What about the electrical factories, or in an auto from the statute books, ancl are deter those who do not have homes in which mobile factory. When I look at the kind mined that they are going to have some to live? What about the slums? What of hovels in which the workers and their thing to say about the processes of gov about the lack of educational opportu families must live, I say to myself, "Is it ernment, because this country is their nity? We could go all the way down the any wonder that they want to strike country, as well as it is yours and mine. line with such questions. once in awhile? It may be a relief. It During the delivery of Mr. HUMPHREY'S I believe that the philosophy behind may be a pleasure." speech, the Taft-Hartley Act was quite clear. I ask my colleagues in· the Senate, Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield for a ques Apparently there was one group in How would you like to live in some of the tion to the Senator from California. America which had to be really "taken filthy, degraded, slum areas of America? Mr. KNOWLAND. I have been lis care of.'' . That was labor. Why? Be · Mr. President, who live in the slums? tening with interest to the able Sena cause her leaders had been honored dur Do the authors of the Taft-Hartley Act tor from Minnesota, relative to differ ing the war for ·beautiful and wonderful live in the slums? Not on your life, Mr. ences between the Taft'-Hartley Act and cooperation. . Because her leaders and President. The people who live in the the proposed Thomas bill, in regard to her rank and file had produced. fabulous slums are the ones upon whom the Taft boycotts. I should like to ask the Sena quantities of war material. Because her Hartley Act bears most heavily. tor from Minnesota what would be the sons and daughters had· been faithful Now we are getting around to doing. a situation, as he understands, under the little something about the slums, late as Thomas bill, if an employer and the em and loyal. Because labor had helped to ployees in a given firm have ·an election, build America. I refer to the working it is, but we are grateful for the oppor tunity just the same. We are getting and by a majo.rity vote, the employees people who emerged from that period determine they do not wish to become with a few little. series E war bonds, around to doing something about better educational opportunities, and perhaps a members of a particular union? In that working people who, after the war, still case, would the employees and the firm had eight or nine children of their in little later we shall be able to do some thing about improving health opportuni be protected under the Thomas bill from laws_living with them in the same little a boycott? house, because there was a housing ties and health care. All those things will work for a better and more healthy Mr. HUMPHREY. No; they would shortage. America. · not, according to my :understanding. What was going on during that time Labor legislation does not determine Mr. KNOWLAND. I should like to was that while the whiplash of war was the pattern of labor-management rela read, if the Senator will permit me, a being .placed on the backs of labor in tionships, Mr. President. In that con brief letter which was sent to the Na 1946 and 1947, more exploitation of tional Labor Relations Board, with a Ame'rica's economic resources was going nection labor legislation is but one fac tor. Good will between employers and copy to me, written by Mr. Jerome J. Rie on by those in vested, privileged posi land, vice president of the Hollywood tions than at any time before in Ameri employees · is another factor. A good community that is interested in the lives Lighting Fixture Co., Inc., of Los Angeles, can history. I make that statement Calif., in which it is stated: without fear of successful contradiction. of its children and fathers and mothers is another important factor, a vital part HOLLYWOOD LIGHTING F'IxTURE Co., !NC., Two .wrongs do not make a right. of good labor-management relations. Los Angeles, Calif., Jun e 2, 1949. Business deserves a fair profit. It de We can have all the law we want to NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, serves an opportunity to enjoy economic have to tell the American people, "You Los Angeles, Calif. conditions which make possible a fair GENTLEMEN: This small corporation is in cannot do this, that, or the other," but business to serve the public, make a profit, profit. But when I speak of business I if we keep then: living in slums, if we speak of the kind of people whom I have and create employment for our 10 to 15 em deny to a man the right to send his chil ployees, most of whom have been with our known in business-those who. made dren to a good school, and if we deny a firm for many years. this country, those in the grocery stores, man health protection, we shall not be We always have and are now complying the drugstores, and the clothing stores. able to enact any kind of law which will with union wage scale and working con They are the ones who made America. make for industrial peace in this Nation. ditions, and prior to June 11, 1948, were a Little business in America is suffering Mr. President, we want law observ closed shop. more and more every day. The big boys On June 4, 1948, a majority of our em ance. Law observance comes from a ployees voted not to authorize the !BEW have tried to pit little business against citizenry that is contented and happy Local 11, AFL, to make an agreement with labor. They have tried to tell the little and realizes that the community is in this employer. Since then, we have oper businessman, like the little contractor in terested in the individual. But cer ated as an open shop as per copy of certifi California, that his enemy is the union. tainly when the individual worker sees, cate of results of union authorization elec Someday he will find out who his enemy for example, that under the law he is tion enclosed. is. He will wake up to dis.cover that faced with jail because of his opposition Enclosed copy of a letter dated May 26, when he wants to borrow money he to an unfair labor practice, or that his 1949, from the !BEW states that unless we must pay 4-percent interest. When big recognize them as bargaining agents for union is going to be sued because some our employees they will declare our company business wants to borrow money, it gets one in the union may have done some unfair to organized labor, give publicity it for 2 percent. That is a 2-percent thing he should not have done, when he through unfair lists, etc., to protect union handicap at the start. The little-busi finds out that the union which helped standards and working conditions in the ness man will wake up and find out that him get his job arid is making a little industry. the only important custome1.s he ever provision for him in the way of a wel As we have stated, this company pays had were those who worked in overalls. · fare fund, is going to be penalized, I u~ion wages and operates under union There are not enough corporation direc submit that he will not be happy until conditions. Therefore, they, by threat and tors to keep every store in America busy. coercion, are endeavoring to force our em . that law is removed from the statute ployees against their will into a closed shop .. That is our philosophy. That is the books. We desire to fulfill the wishes of our em philosophy to which the Wagner Act was I do not know whether we shall get ployees and are agreeable to another elec dedicated-the philosophy that the around to doing that at this time, but I · tion; however, none has been requested. American people have the right to organ submit that the processes of democracy · We believe the threats as contained in this ize to protect themselves, to lift their are as r.elentless and ever-flowing as letter to us of May 26 show that they intend 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-~ SENATE 7637 to use illegal acts against this company and Mr. HUMPHREY. I ' should like to petition. I do not believe it is right to our employees, and we ask you to inform make this observation to the Senator pass a general prohibition outlawing all ua .what protection under the law our com- . pany, and our employees have against these from California: First of all, the facts secondary boycotts because one can be 111egal acts on the part of the IBEW. he presents I accept for the RECORD, but found in which the situation is bad. Why Yours very truly, I do not know what may be the whole does the union want to organize em JEROME 'J. RIELAND, background of the particular ca.Se. I ployees? ·Because the mo're unorganized Vice President. think it is one which ought to be at places there are, the greater the threat (Copy to WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND and Ro:B least well substantiated by both sides to standards which have been built up ERT TAFT.) before we assume that the facts are fully over a long period of time. Every weak correct. point in those standards is a threat to There was enclosed a photostatic copy Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, may standards of fair wages and good work of a letter from the · International I interrupt the Senator from Minnesota ing conditions which have been estab:.. Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, dated to request that the certificate of results lished. May 26, 1949, which reads as follows: of the union authorization election, to The position of the junior Senator INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD, which reference has been made, be also .from Minnesota is that we should have OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION No. 11, printed in the ·RECORD as a part of my no sweeping prohibition with reference Los Angeles, Calif., May 26, 1949. remarks. to secondary boycotts, even if one is HOLLYWOOD LIGHTING FI~TURE Co., There being no objection, the certifi wanted, based upon a few extreme cases, Los Angeles,· Calif. cate was ordered to be printed . in the or a sweeping statement to indicate that GENTLEMEN: The International Brot her RECORD, as fallows: all secondary boycotts are good· be-cause hood of Electrical Workers, local Union, No. UNITED STATES ' OF AMERICA, NATIONAL :· LABOR. l can find .one or two that may ·be, good·. 11, American Federation of Labor and its RELATIONS BOARO---IN THE'MATTER OF 'HOLLY'.; Mr. IVES. Mr. Presidrnt, - will the Electrical Fixture· Unit, presently enjoys in W L vD LIGHTING 'FIXTURE Co. AND INTERNA Senator yield? dustry-wide bargaining with employers who TIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF E:t.ECTR:tCAL WORKERS The PRESIDING OFFICER picketing is far more than that, as has a great deal of power,. An extreme Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. the able Senator from Minnesota knows .. case where there are 15 workers has been Mr. KNOWLAND. I must beg. to In fact, it is. an economic stranglehold on .cited. differ with the able Senator from Minne the particular firm, on .the employer, .be I ask the Senator from New York, sota, because he says; "Let us assume cause if a picket line is respected, . no should the standards of industry, should that in the Duplex case an election had trucks of . the teamsters' union · will the fair pay, the working conditions, the been held." The fact of the matter is deliver any raw materials or pick up any health conditions, the wage conditions, t· .. t there was no machinery, such as manufactured products. If it is carried of 90 percent of the workers in a whole has been provided under the laws of the .out, it simply means an utter strangula industry be jeopardized because of the country at this time, so that a free and tion of the business, which it may have welfare desires of a handful of people secret election can be held and the work taken many years, a lifetime, or even two who may be a minority within the in ers can express themselves as to (a) or three lifetimes of work to build up. It dustry? What we are talking about is whether they want to joint an A. F. of L. may mean that the 15 employees in this the establishment of uniform standards. union; (b) whether they want to join a particulaz: case-it is a small company, Mr. IVES. Mr. President, I should CIO union; or (c) whether they do not but the argument would hold true in a like to ask further questions in line with want to join a union at all. That is guar large one-are thrown out of work the question raised by the Senator to anteed them and they are protected in through no fault of their own, and it be me. I am not talking about substand their freedom to act by the laws of the comes an economic stranglehold, a mat ard conditions, or anything of the kind. land. So it seems to me there is a very ter of life or death to that particular The description given by the able Sen great difference between the conditions firm and its employees. So -a· much ator from California of the condition he that prevailed at the time of the Duplex greater problem is involved than simply cited was one which indicated there were case and now. I can understand why the problem affectin~ the 15 employees. no substandard conditions . involved. the Senator may not agree with me on The President of 'the United States, Mr. HUMPHREY. To be sure, but the that subject. Honest differences of several years ago, was faced with quite .Taft,Hartley law prohibits all boycotts, opinion exist about it. ~problem, as the able Senator fr.om Min even if the conditions are substandard. Mr. HUMPHREY. I wish to say to nesota knows. The Senator was not· a Mr. IVES. I am not talking about the the Senator from California that we do Member of the Senate at that time, but Taft-Hartley law. · not agree, and I suppose that is quite I remember that at the time the railroad . Mr .. HUMPHREY. That is what the , fair. But I should like to say that the -strike was in effect the country was being debate is about. We are not debating economic facts are the same now as they faced with the situation of the entire eco faith .. hope and charity, but the Taft were then, irrespective of whether the nomic life of the United States being Hartley law,:and whether or not it should machinery for the recognition of the strangled. It seemed as though · our be re:p>ealed: union existed at the time of the Duplex great, complex economy would . grind to · Mr. .KNOWJ..AND. I . t.ould like to ask case. The point is that the economic a stop. · Not only would that have the Senator from Minnesota if he does facts as outlined in that connection are brought great hardship to many innocent not feel that there has been a new factor the same now as they were then. In the people, but on top of it all probably would in the situation since the decisions to Duplex case Mr. Justice Brandeis and have threatened the very peace and secu which he refers, namely, the enactment Mr. Justice Holmes pointed out that the rity of the entire Western World. of the Wagner Act itself?· The Senator situation then existing formed a threat The President of the United States at to the basic economic solvency and the that time -felt it necessary to propose from California can ·fallow the logic of to Congress legislation of a very ·extreme the remarks of · the Senator from Min basic economic stature of the rest of the nesota as they relate to a time prior workers. Of course, we can argue as we nature, which I may say the junior Sen will on this point.. I think it is a matter ator· from California did not ·support, thereto and as to the position taken by and which the Senator from Ohio [Mr. a great many of the unions. Workers of difference of philosophy. I think I can say quite candidly that if secondary TAFT] himself stopped on the fioor· of prior to that time did not have the right the Senate of the United States-'-a pro to organize. There were many short boycotts go to the point of violence, local police laws come into operation. posal by the President to draft ·workers sighted employers who would use eco into the Army in order to protect· the nomic means to prevent the organiza Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will public interest and welfare of the Nation. tion of their workers. Prior to the the Senator yield? So the situation can come to a point adoption of the Wagner Act, under the Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. where the entire economy of the. Nation conditions to which the Senator referred, Mr. KNOWLAND. I shall state what is being strangled. The power to· bring the boycott was perhaps the only weapon I believe is the point of difference be that about is too much power for any labor· might have had. But no longer is tween the Senator from Minnesota and responsible person to want or for any that true, or at least it is not as valid the Senator from California. The able irresponsible person to have. Therefore as it was at that time. Is that not cor Senator from Minnesota has had quite a the Government itself has an obligation rect? fine record, I may say, in his regard for to see to it that on an extended scale Mr. HUMPHREY. That is not the and attempt to protect minority rights. the strangulation which the Senator point of view of the Senator from Min But it seems to me that in this case he ·from Minnesota is apparently uncon nesota. As a matter of fact, the right apparently is taking the position that cerned about when it affects only 15 em of the boycott was never secured, as we minority rights should be sacrificed, be ployees, does not occur. all know, by the Wagner Act. That cause here we have a situation where Mr. HUMPHREY. · Mr. President, ·r right was not even so much as talked free American citizens, acting under the am very happy to have had the observa about, let alone legislated on. It is the laws of the land, have, under the auspices tions from the Senator from California. opinion of the Senator from Minnesota and under the direction of the National The Senator has taken us from a case that the Duplex case. is almost identical Labor Relations Board, a Board created involving 15 employees to a national with the situation that is being talked by the laws of the land, held their elec emergency. Let us now consider the na about and being explained by the Sena tion, have cast their ballots, have reached tional emergency. That national emer tor from California. a determination. Yet the position of the gency was not settled by injunction. It Let us consider the Duplex case, where able Senator from Minnesota is that be was not settled by the provisions of the there were three union shops and where cause they happen to have made their Taft-Hartley Act. It was settled by the there was one that was nonunion. Let own free choice, which may not coincide President of the United States appealing us assume that there had been an elec with the choice of people on the outside, to public opinion. If I had been in the tion held in the nonunion shop and that they and their employers are to be sub Senate at the time I, too, would hav.e the workers had turned down the pro ject to economic sanctions. voted against such a ridiculous proposal posal to make it a union shop. Never It seems to me it is a little naive to say, as that to draft men into the Army.. I theless, the argument 'of the dissent, at "Well, if somebody wants to picket the commend the Senator for his courageous least of Mr. Justice Brandeis and Mr. Senator from Minnesota or the Senator stand, and any other Senators who may Justice Holmes, would still prevail. from California, that is his free right." have taken that particular stand. 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 7639 But let us not permit ourselves to be stopped the . shipment of· -materials to I am not saying that that is the phi taken from 15 employees to a national. certain people. · That has been done losophy . of the Senator from Minnesota, emergency. Let us talk about the rights repeatedly. because I am quite convinced that his of the minority. What rights do we Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, wilL the philosophy is entirely contrary to that. mean? The right to due process of law; Senator yield? · Assuming that the facts are correctly the right to have one's say; the right Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. stated in the -case to which I have re to be a participating citizen. In the Mr. TAFT. Can the Senator cite any f erred, the danger is that if we deny Senate the minority has certain rights. such case? those 15 workers the right to decide for In the economic picture we could have . Mr. HUMPHREY. Of course the Sen themselves, and say that some greater almost the same situation as we have ator can cite such a case. The Rexall power can come in and strangle the busi in the Senate. The process of legisla Drug Co. does not ship to anyone except ness and throw them out of wor-k, re tion can be stopped in the Senate by a Rexall merchants. . gardless of how they vote, to that extent minority. On the economic frontier, by , Mr. TAFT. Under the decision just we go down the same road which has preserving little islands where substand rendered by the Supreme Court of the been taken by. nations which have lost ard conditions prevail, the minority may United. States in the Standard Oil case the basic liberties which I know the Sen destroy some of the rights of tbe ma that would be ; a violation of law. ator from Minnesota and the Senator jority. Sooner or later we are going to . · Mr. HUMPHREY. I -was in the drug from California are most desirous of talk about the majority as well as the business for a number o-f years. I sold preserving. minority. The real threat in America, Rexall products for 15 years, so I can Mr. HUMPHREY. · Let me turn the so far as the Senate is concerned, is that speak with some degree of authority on· argument of ·the ·Senator around~ He the rights of the majority are not pro- that subject. has been talking about what he describes tected. · . · Mr. TAFT. Has the Senator read the as a little island of democracy. To me Let us go back to the economi.c situa opinion of the Supreme Court ·handed it is not an island of democracy. To me tion. The Senator from California down yesterday, with ·respect to those it represents the danger of ultimate de found a very convenient case involving who deal in Standard Oil products? - struction of men's rights to -have some 15 employees in a little electrical shop. Mr. HUMPHREY. I must point out to thing to say-about· their security, and They had- an election, and they decided the distinguished Senator from Ohio something to say about the conditions that· they did not. want to belong to a that the Senator from Minnesota was so · of their employment. union. The Senator did not give us all busy at the Farm-Labor Council at ·Des Is the Senator telling me that we the information. He did not tell us Moines yesterday, preaching the gospel should· ignore -a situation in which we whether the wage -scale was on a yeariy of the repeal of the Taft-Hartley-law and find a little island of fascism? Is the-sen.;. - basis or -WhetheF it measured Up to :the that of the Brannan farm program; that ator telling·me that there should· be n:o . prevailing ,wage scale in the community. . he did not· have time to tead-that d·e- right to invoke · economic sanctions · ' Let us assume a situation.in wbich.the · cision. . against such a situation? Is that· what eµiploY,ees · are not" paid well. . Let us take Mr: KNOWLAND. Mr. Preside_nt, '• · ~11 . the .Senator· is in~icating to _. me?· · Of : a situation in whiCh the working .condi- . the Senator yield? course' not. - tfoiis are substandard. Instead'. of get : It is reducing things to an absurdity to . ting $1.50 an hour, the employees are · ·Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. First I wish to- deny jump from 15 workers in California to receiving 75 cents an hour. In the.elec the inference that the-Senator from Cali- · the international scene. Exactly. the trical business-and this is no· assump- . same argument can be applied on both tion-the vast majority of electrical con f ornia trumped up this particular ·case. ·. I ·received a letter from a constituent in sides. - It is a ·question of whether or not, tracting busin~ss all over America _is for example; in· the printing industry, unionized. Union standartls have been California, wpic:1 letter · arrived at my desk today, togethel' . with photostatic we feel that the . standards which have · e~tablished n~t oply Jor the b~~·ep:.t of ' copies of the exhibit· in the case. I · felt ·· been developed through the :years' should the workers. and of the employers, ·. but · be constantly threatened'by substandard for the benefit_of the public. . We have that the case was entirely pert~nent to .tiie discussion: Over the period· of the employers, -substandard work, and sub- _ had plenty of-examples of faulty mate7 standard condition's. ... - · rial being produced by novices, by those . past .2 years; and· prior to-the enactment who did not knov: their business. That · of the Taft-Hartley law, I-ha:ve- received "It is ·impo-rtarif that .. the' workers of . .is an .important factor in such a complex ' many communic·ations. . Some· were as tl:ie Nation have something to say about and almost professional type of work ·as · meritorious as this, ·arid some were· not. their fobs. It is important that they have the electric-al-appliance · business 'or the I have ·nbt· selected a· particular case to protection 'against·being fired ·because .·of · electrical contracting busine.ss.· ' bring ·before the Senate· today. As 1 -· the capriciousness of someone iii min- · Would the Senator from California say stated, the letter arrived on my' desk to agement~ It is important that they have : that an entire industry should be denied day from California. It is dated June something to say about their health . the right to protect itself, after having . 6. . Even by air mail it could' not have standards on the job, and about ·their built up standards of production·, wages, reached here much ,sooner. w_orking conditions. If there are :Spots · and working conditions? Does the Sen:.. I should like to add one ·further ob here and there which threaten those ator from California contend th.at we servation, and then I shall not interrupt standards, the workers in the legitimate, should have a law which would "permit the Senator further . . I must leave the fair-standards industries have every the mushrooming of unfair, substandard ' Chamber to attend a committee meeting. . right- to apply economic sanctions. I my conditions in a particular industry? T'ne difficulty" I find with the Sena that without any hesitation· whatever. · Should those who have worked for 50 tor's line of reasoning is that it appears · Mr. IVES. · Mr. President, will the years to build up their standards have that, regardless of how the workers may Senator yield? . imposed upon them a law which would decide in their own . free election, the . ·Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. protect the little man who would like to Senator's position is that either the Mr. IVES. The Senator from New destroy those standards, and which unions o.r the Government should take York does not disagree at all with the would give: him the right to destroy what the position of papa knows best; that able Senator from Minnesota in his ref the vast majority had buiit l:p over a even though the free choice is something erence to substandard conditions. Very generation or two generations? else, we should have the power to en definitely the Senator from New York We cannot assume from the argument force a contr.ary judgment. The difficul feels that where such conditions as have of the Senator from California that all ty with that pl:}.ilosophy is that it" is the been pictured by the Senator from Min the cases are similar to the case which same type of philosophy which we find nesota exist, a secondary boycott by way he has portrayed. Even in the case in a number ot countries which have un of economic sanction or reprisal is per which he has described, the em fortunately been taken behind the iron fectly in order, and should be in order ployer has the right of free speech, as curtain, after the people themselves had under conditions of that kind. does the employee. The junior Senator voted the other way, on the theory that But what about the situation in which from Minnesota is in favor of that prin some superstate knows more about what substandard conditions do not exist? ciple. The employers ha.ve the right to is· good for the people than do the people That is the kind of situation about which associate themselves with employers' as themselves who express their views in a the distinguished Senator from Cali sociations. Employers' associations have free election. fornia has been speaking. There is no 7640 CONGRESSIONAL' RECORD-SENATE JUNE 14 question of substandard conditions in Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, or by attempting to provide shorter volved in that case. Presumably the rather than get ourselves into a difficult hours. That has been attempted be standards are just as high as the stand parliamentary situation, inasmuch as the cause it is well ur..derstood that once a ards in the rest of the industry, or per Senator from New York and I often see union is destroyed, employers can do haps they are higher. The case referred each other to discuss things, and I gain about as they please. to by the Senator from California is a great knowledge from him, I shall phrase But, Mr. President, a free society is not case in which a group of employees, by these questions simply as rhetorical one in which there are gifts of some of a majority vote, decided that they did questions, since I am sure the Senator the good things of life. Certainly there not want to organize. Why should they from New York is planning to submit an are in the United States hundreds of em be forced to do so? Why should they · amendment relating to secondary boy ployers who are willing to pay far more be driven to it through the use of the cotts. than the regular wage scale. During secondary boycott, or any other form of The Senator from New York has said the war years there were many instances economic reprisal, when the question that of course there are conditions where of that sort. But I submit that that does not involve any effect whatever upon secondary boycotts are justifiable. He kind of procedure does not guarantee standards or conditions? I do not fol has appointed himself as a moral King long-range security or long-range con low the able Senator from Minnesota on Solomon to decide what are substand ditions suitable for human decency, and that tack. The minute those standards ard conditions and what are above that. it does not give the workers the protec fall, the economic boycott can be exer I, too, am opposed to substandard con tion they have been able to obtain from cised to bring them back. But this is ditions, and I think secondary boycotts their particular unions. For instance, not a question of that kind. can be most useful in eliminating them. there were printers who were willing to Mr. HUMPHREY. That poses very The next rhetorical question I ask the_ pay more than the union wage scale, and nicely the problem of how to write gen Senator from New York is whether h'e were willing to pay it for less than the eral legislation for something which may is not in fact opposed to all secondary regular number of hours of work. But be termed -substandard or something boycotts. I think the answer he would the union members found security in which may be termed above that. give is quite obvious, because he him their union. · Mr. IVES. Is the Senator asking that self has said that of course he believes Mr. President, I ask unanimous con question of me? that where conditions are substandard, sent to have printed in the RECORD in Mr. HUMPHREY. It is now my op economic sanctions should be applied. connection with my remarks an analysis portunity to speak, inasmuch as I have In other words, he realizes that there are of the Taft amendments. already .. yielded to the junior. Senator secondary boycotts that are justifiable. This analysis of the Taft amendments from New York. Then the question is, How are we to was prepared at my request. I have had Mr. IVES. Mr. President, I should write proper legislation? Who is to be the assistance of several prominent at like to answer that question. the judge? Is the Government of the torneys who are experienced in the field The PRESIDING OFFICER union dues, proved in the past 2 (7) No change. narrow the area of selection, as the amend years to be entirely unwarranted, would re (8) No change. ment proposes, runs directly contrary to this main. (9) No change. concept. Senator TAFT seeks to make the Ninth. Welfare funds would be subject to (10) No change. Board a political football. slightly modified restrictions which would - (11) Supervisors: Minor change in defini (b) No change-except to accommodate be no less onerous and would inject the Gov tion of "supervisor." All supervisors remain the enlargement of NLRB from five to seven ernment further and unnecessarily into this unprotected by the Federal law. No machin members. field. ery is provided to protect the public against -(c) No change. Tenth. Financial reports would still be re dislocations occasioned by supervisor's rep ( d) The NLRB office of an independent quired only of unions. resentation disputes. general counsel ls abolished. The shame Eleventh. The anti-Communist oath would (12) No change. fully antilabor administration of General not be extended explicitly to Fascist and (13) Agency: A minor alteration in the Counsel Denham has resulted in even Sena totalitarian organizations and would be statement of ·the agency' tests to be applied tor TAFT proposing the abolition of his of broadened to the point of being administra in determining liab111ty of labor unions fice. But the new NLRB will exercise func tively unworkable. under the statute in reality perpetuates the tions now performed . by Mr. Denham, in Senator TAFT'S desire to make a show of unfair provision of section 2 ( 13) of Taft cluding dangerous powers by way of injunc-. concession may be seen in the last of 23 Hartley and turns back the clock to the pre tion, if TAFT'S amendments are adopted. changes which he has asserted his amend Norris-LaGuardia Act middle ages of labor (Cf. sec. 10 (j) infra.) ments would make in the Taft-Hartley Act. relations. This provision is grossly unfair · · Section 4. Restrictions on NLRB opera Every amendment, however insignificant, has and unsatisfactory. tions: been dragged in to make this list look impres 1. Under the common law rules of agency (a) This provides, like the Taft-Hartley sive. In the main these concessions are de in effect before the Norris-LaGuardia Act was Act, that the Board cannot hire economists. signed only to correct evils in the Taft-Hart passed, courts imposed the most severe doc This provision is objectionable because many ley Act for which no defenders can now be trines· of responsibility on labor organrza of the problems with which the Board deals found. The list includes repeal of the re tions. Unions were held liable for the unau can be intelligently handled only in the quirement of elections authorizing unions to thorized or unratl:fled acts of strangers, light of their economic context. It. is es sign union-shop contracts, a requirement members, or employer-p_aid agents on the sential that the ·Board receive the benefits which has served only to prove that em most shadowy evidence of knowledge. Jus of economic analysis. As a matter of fact, ployees favor such contra§ts overwhelmingly. tice Frankfurter officially called this doctrine the Board recognizes this inadequacy and It includes repeal ·or the prohibition of feath in abusive misapplication of the law. has been compelled, despite the prohibitions er-bedding, that much talked of but nonex 2. In its decisions, the present NLRB has of Taft-Hartley, to engage the services of istent evil. It eliminates the peculiarly un held unions liable on trivial evidence even economists under the designation of "indus justified exclusion of economic strikers from for acts which they have specifically for trial analysts." representation elections. bidden. Under the NLRB interpretation of (b) No change. At the same time Senator TAFT uses the de this Taft-Hartley provision, unions become Section 5. NLRB powers: No change. mand for Taft-Hartley repeal as an opportu liable for the impetuous acts of anyone on Section 6. NLRB rule making: nity for introducing new repressive features. or near their area of activity. (a) Administrative Procedures Act: This These include a new approval of employer in 3. Supporters of the Taft amendments section makes certain that the Board is sub terference with elections under the guise of argue that unions are being made liable only ject to the provisions of the Administrative free speech, relaxing of procedural safeguards in the same way' as corporations. This is not Procedures Act. . against injunctions without notice, and fur so. Labor unions are loose-knit associations (b) Ceding jurisdiction: This section au ther limitations on the check-off. of men striving to improve wages, hours, and thorizes the Board to enter into agreements The Taft-Hartley law cannot be salvaged working conditions. They are not compara with State agencies, whereby the Board by amendments proposed by its author. The ble to corporations which have relatively few would cede jurisdiction over certain matters time is past due for a return to a construc authoritative spokesmen, who can be well affecting interstate commerce. Senator TAFT tive labor relations policy based upon the controlled and easily disciplined· and di now admits that ·the requirements in the principles of free collective bargaining. rected. Unions are comparable rather to Taft-Hartley Act that the Board be pro SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF SENATOR voluritary groups associated for nonbusiness hibited from ceding jurisdiction to State TAFT'S AMENDMENTS purposes: labor agencies unless the State laws admin istered by such agencies are consistent with _ "The more it changes, the more it's the 4. The change in wording from Taft-Hart ley to the Taft amendment does not reduce the Taft-Hartley Act, was for the purpose of same thing." (Alphonse Karr, French writer, forcing the passage of little Taft-Hartley lr49.) liability. If it does anything, it provides an ingenious legal argument for increasing lia Acts (minority report, p. 8). Since this "There is a certain relief in change, even program· has failed to accomplish its ob though it be from bad to worse; as I have bility. The amended statute would, as its sponsors admit (minority report, p. 13), re jective, Senator TAFT is now willing to permit found in traveling in a stage-coach, that it the Board to cede jurisdiction irrespective of is often a comfort to shift one's position and affirm NLRB decisions under Taft-Hartley such as that in the Sunset Line and Twine consistency. be bruised in a new place." (Washington This provision ls objected to because the Irving, Tales of a Traveler, preface.) case, which held international unions re sponsible for unauthorized acts of individ Boa.rd has always asserted power, in its dis "So when a raging fever burns, we shift cretion, to refuse to handle a particular from side to side by turns; and 'tis a poor ual members. The Taft amendments would reintroduce the conspiracy doctrines which matter because the effect on interstate com relief we gain to change the place, but keep merce was, in it judgment, insubstantial. the pain." (Isaac Watts, Hymns and Spirit prevailed in the pre-Norris-LaGuardia period. Therefore, · the provision seems unnecessary. ual Songs, 146.) Section 7. Right to organize: The deletion "We have no objection to the technical Section 3. NLRB structure and internal organizations: of the employee's right to refrain from union repeal of the Taft-Hartley law. We recog activity, which was added by Taft-Hartley, nize that whatever is passed at this time will (a) This section enlarges the size of the ls no concession. In section 8 (b) (1) sub be a new labor-management relations act. Labor Board to seven members, as com stantially the same Taft-Hartley doctrine But we insist that it should retain the main pared with five under Taft-Hartley and is reinserted. basic principles of the Labor-Management three under the Wagner Act. It increases Section 8. Unfair labor practices: Relations Act of 194 7. * "' "' We · retain their term to 7 years, as compared with (a) (1) Employer interference. No change. in all our substitutes the essential principles five under Taft-Hartley. This increase in (a) (2) Company unions. No change. of the Taft-Hartley Act." (Senator TAFT, the length of terms, however, would apply (a) (3) Prohibition of closed shop. The CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, June 8, 1949, p. 7402.) only to members hereafter appointed. The Taft-Hartley Act all but destroys union se There follows a section-by-section analysis Taft amendment provides that not more curity. It achieves this result ( 1) by bar of the "changes" which Senator TAFT pro than four members shall be of the same ring the closed shop and other forms of pref poses in the Taft amendments ·to the Thomas politicai party, whereas the Taft-Hartley-Act erential hiring outright; (2) by permitting bill now under consideration in the Senate has no similar provision. only ·an extremely watered-down form of {statements as to "change" or "no change" . 1. No reason is seen for lengthening the union security: and (3) by permitting even refer to Taft-Hartley Act) : terms to 7 years. this weakened form of union security to be 7642 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE ~ JUNE 14- effectively implemented. Union security is meet specific needs despite the.harassing pro the union ts given the right to refuse to work rendered meaningless where unions are visions of existing law has become so pro upon goods which have been contracted out. denied the power to procure the discharge . nounced that there is a real possibility of a by a struck plant. As a matter of fact, Fed-. of labor spies, and company agents. This complete break-down in the. enforcement of eral Judge Rifkind, in the Ebasco Products section dealing with union security leaves the these makeshift arrangements. These efforts Co. case, denied a request for an injm;1ction Taft-Hartley Act substantially unchanged: are being condemned by the Labor Board de under such circumstances. The court held 1. It continues to prohibit the closed shop. spite their goal of establishing mutually sat that an attempt to persuade .~mployees to re 2. It permits only a very restricted form isfactory working arrangements. fuse to work upon such goods does not con of union shop. The type of union shop ( c) In certain highly skilled crafts the stitute a secondary boycott. permitted would require an employee to join closed shop is essential to the maintenance 2. Unions would still be prohibited from . the union 30 days after being employed, but of union standards. Examples are printing refusing further to process goods coming

would allow the union to seek his di£charge trades, toolmakers, machinists, many of the from a struck plant or from a plant which is 1 only for (a) nonpayment of initiation fees maritime occupations, etc. operating under sweatshop or substandard and dues; (b) a strike in violation of a col (d; The Taft amendment provision allow conditions. Under this section unions would lective-bargaining agreement; or (c) mem- . ing an employer to notify a labor organiza continue to be prohibited from even peace- . bership in the Communist Party. The latter tion of vacancies does not authorize the hir fully exercising their right to utilize unfair. two grounds for discharge are added ,by the ing hall or preferential hiring. The minority lists or "we don't patronize" lists. Under Taft amendments to the first ground, which report makes it all too clear that this provi Taft-Hartley, as under the Taft amendments, is already stated in the Taft-Hartley Act. sion is meaningless and ineffectual. In fact, a union may not even refuse to handle goods_ 3. It abolishes the requirement of · Taft the minority report (p. 39) states that if an which are made in substandard nonunion Hartley that an authorization election be , employer should prefer a union applicant. plants. This provision restores to the law. held before a union shop agreement can be over a nonunion applicant, he is guilty of an the very conditions brought to national at entered. into; but it continues to provide unfair labor practice. tention by the Duplex.v. Deering case anQ. ~he for the deauthorization election, which could (a) (4) Discrimination for using NLRB .. New Bedford Stonecutters case, which were be called for annually. No change. among the most powerfu~ reasons leading to 4. Finally, ~ the Taft amendment adds a (a) (5) Employer refusal to bargain. No the enactment of the Norris-LaGuardia act. new provision that an employer. may notify change. (c) In the Taft amendment Renator TAFT a labor organization of vacancies. (b) (1) Union coercion: apparently seeks to restore the rule of law The prohi)Jition of the closed shop and the 1. This section represents no substantial resp~cting use of free speech by employers limitations upon the union shop were pre change from the Taft-Hartley Act. Elimina that was applicable unde:r.: the Wagner Act. dicated on the assumption that employees tion of the word "restraint" is a meaning In board and court decisions under the Wag were for.ced into unions against their will. less concession since coercion-kept in the ner act, such as the Virginia Electric Power The experience under the Taft-Hartley Act Taft amendment--includes restraint. The Co. case and thomas v. Collins, it was . during these past 2 years refutes this mis theory of this Taft amendment and a sim-. held that the employer had full right under conception, .Even the General Counsel of liar Taft-Hartley provision that unions co the Constitution to discuss unions and the Board has conceded that the provision erce employees from enjoying their right unionism so long as no intimidation or coer of the act requiring the union shop election to work, is particularly objectionable. cion was involved. In view of these decision·s: prior to· the making of the contract was Unions exist to safeguard the right to work. the new amenciment would seem unnecessary. needless and wasteful. Statistics supplied by This Taft provision is designed to help strike In one respect the new amendment is ob the Labor 'Board show that authorization breakers-and nobody else. It modifies jectionable on grounds other than that it ·is elections have been won by unions in 98.2 Taft-Hartley to empower the NLRB to en-. superfluous. Under the new amendment percent of the cases. This affirmatively es join unions from coercion of employees in Senator TAFT extends the fre.e-speech pr_ohi-. tablishes that employees definitely desire the right to work. This is merely a rein bitions to election· cases as w.ell as to unfair.. . union security . . Senator Taft, although he sertion of the provision purportedly deleted labor-practice cases. His amendment restricts:· would eliminate -the requirement of an au in section 7., supra. the Board in its right to set asiqe. elections thorization election, still persists in his mis 2. The provision in its entirety is unneces where all the circumstances· indicate. the vot taken notion that employees are opposed to sary. State and local courts and police au ing was n.ot held in a free atmosphere and· union security of the traditional kind repre thorities are entirely competent and ade where the results might have been unduly sented by the closed shop and the union shop. quate to deal with such police measures. affected even though the employer is no1; It is to be observed further that by this No reason appears for subjecting unions to found guilty of committing an unfair-labor amendment, a union security clause of even the dual liabllity of State and Federal re practice. In this respect, this aq-iendmen~ i.~ the watered-down nature permitted by the striction. more onerous than the Taft-l:lartley Ac,:t. , act can be eliminated by a deauthorization 3. Moreover, NLRB decisions under the ( d) Collective bargaining requirement.s.: election. The holding of such deauthoriza Taft-Hartley Act's analogous provision have This provision is substfl.ntialJy the same as , tion elections in the middle of a contract seriously interfered with purely internal Taft-Hartley. It preserves the complex f}nd, period would create incalculable chaos in union affairs, and have forbidden even peace burdensome notice requirements of the Taft the administration and the enforcement' of ful picketing. Hartley Act concerning strikes and contract the contract, and destroy the very stability 4. In several cases the Board's general terminations. which labor agreements are designed to counsel and trial examiners construed co 1. Failure to comply with these compli· ercion to include activities by a union in con secure. cat~d and technical provisions concerning In many industries the closed shop is nection with its own members. Such deci the 60-day and 30-day notice requirements necessary, either from the standpoint of the sions have rendered completely meaningless are such as to make unlawful a strike for law udon or the employer, or both: the proviso in section 8 (b) (1) (a) preserv ful objectives, or in protest against uncon• (a) In industries where employment is ing the right of i.abor organizations to pre scionable conditions. scribe their own rules. casual or sporadic the closed shop is essen 2. The notice provisions are exceedingly tial to the continued existence of the union. (b) (2) Employee discrimination: This provision parallels the provisos of section 8 rigid. If, for example, a union gives the A provision requiring new employees to join proper notices, but then wishes to continue in 30 days gives the union no protection in (a) (3) and is objectionable for the reasons already stated. negotiating for a· new contract beyond the industries where the job does not last that time specified in the original notices, it may, long. Examples are building trades, must-. (b) (3) Union duty to bargain collectively. No change. This provision has proved par as a result of patient continued good faith clans, stevedoring, and maritime. Further, bargaining, find· itself in violation of t-he in these industries an organized labor pool is ticularly onerous in the effect given it by NLRB General Counsel Denham; the Typo notice provisions. Th!s is exactly what essential to provide competent labor to the happened to the machinists union in the employers as soon as called for or when graphical Union has been required to defend four suits in which it is asserted that union Boeing strike. There strikers lost employee· needed. Unless this labor pool is union con status, and their union is the subject of a trolled, the union cannot survive. insistence on abiding by its constitution and laws, or attempts to maintain uniform work $1,500,000 damage suit by reason of this un (b) In certain industries where business duly technical and needlessly harassing pro units are small and competition fierce-such standards, are unlawful. as in the men's clothing and the ladies' gar (b) (4) Boycotts: This. is the same boy vision. ment industries-closed or preferential shops cott and strike prohibition as contained in 3. If a temporary extension agreement is have established stability in the interest of the Taft-Hartley Act. Unions would still be entered into in an effort to ga.in time to the public, the union, and the employer. The denied the right to seek the aid of their negotiate a final agreement; a strike follow union security limitation provisions con fellow unionists to strike or to publicize the ing the extension ag'feement may be held tained in the Taft-Hartley Act produced dis- _ facts of a labor dispute or to exert peaceful to violate the notice provision. Thus the putes between unions and employers in sit economic pressure. This section destroys effect of the law is to encourage strikes im uations where both have agreed upon the the employee's freedom of choosing not to mediately upon the expiration of the no merits of union security. In many cases work when such work damages his union tice period. where strikes have not occurred union secu position. 4. Unilateral employer action oppressive to rity clauses have been written or adapted so 1. The only proposed relaxation of the employees cannot be met by an effective as to fit the provisions of the Taft-Hartley Taf~-Hart~ey .Act is with respect . to a single, strike. Thus if an employer breaches a col: Act.·. This attempt to .adapt contract& to but infrequent, type of occurrence, 11'1 which lective bargaining agreement by reducing • f •• I" 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RE'CORD-SENATE 7°643 wages or extending work assignments: the ent requirement that the regional-office em- raises no issue whlch is substantially likely union's immediate strike in legitimate pro- ployee who conducts a hearing shall make to affect the election result. The prehear- test may be held to be unlawful. no recommendation to the Board, thus leav- ing election procedure was adopted by the Section 9. Representatives and elections: ing ln eiiect the provisions described above Labor Board shortly before enactment of the (a) No change. This section is the same and the further provision that elections must Taft-Hartley Act. It proved highly effective as the Taft-Hartley provision which declares be. held in all cases before a certification is in eliminating useless hearings on issues that the union selected by a majority of granted. raised solely for purposes of delay. No jus- the employees shall be the exclusive bar- 1. The provision for petitions by employ- tification for its prohibition in the Taft- gaining agent for all the employees, and is ers invites the filing of such petitions at the Hartley Act appears, and any amendment subject to a proviso, attached by the Taft- beginning of organization campaigns. Em- on the point should unambiguously restore Hartley Act, that an individual employee players are encouraged to jockey for position the Board's power to hold such elections. has the rigbt to present grievances aRd to in representation proceedings; despite the (c) -· (5) No change in this provision de- have his grievances adjusted without inter- fact that the .question of selecting a bar- claring that the extent to which employees vention of the union as long as the adjust- gaining agent is properly on~ for thJl em- have · organized s,hall not control in deter- ment do.es not violate the union contract ployees alone to decide. , . . mining appropriate units. and the union is given opportunity to be 2. The provision for decertification . pJ;"o- · T~e - oqjections to the "extent of organi- . present at the adjustment. ·- ceedings invites periodic distµrbances of ex- zation" doctrine, described 'in extreme terms · 1. Under the proviso, y;hile the union istfng bargaining relations. I:n the- Minority Report (pp. 12-13)' should ~ which negotiated the contract covering the 3. There is no reason why employers should be· \Yeighed against the simple fact that it agreement may be present when the classi- be allowed to petition '.for an election without is frequently difficult to· organize a larg.e fication is discussed, the- grievance ma;y be showing that a s.ubstantial number of .the industrial concern,_a Nation-wide insurance settled without its approval. This permits empl0-yees wish . to be repre~ented by .t!le company, -a chain of retail stores, 'or similar an employer to disrupt the union in at least union while .imposing that requirement on operations in. cine .campaign. The extent of two ways: (a) He can put pressure on .the employee or union petitions. _ . organization doctrine was intended to en- individual employee ta settle the grievance It is not enough to say in this connection courage thi;: practice of collective bargaining on disadvantageous terms. In fact, ;tie can that the union can prevent p.rematur!l ajec- by making the organization of such ente'r- even threaten the employee with di~charge tions by refusing to ask for recog~ition. pr_ises feasible_~ That is a proper objective if he refuses to accept the settlement offered . (See minority report, p. 11.) · It is ordinarily under a .labor relations act. by the employer since such a discharge _would imposstble for a union· in the middle 9f an .(~) No .change in this purely .proc.e,P:ural not be protected against under section a organization· campaign thus to admit pub- < pr_ovision regarding judicial rev-iew. ot., rep- (a) (3·) of the act, not being a concerted . licly th_at it cannot hope. to win an- el~cti) If the employer prefers, he can use the elections in all cases wher~ a question.. of Pt'l:P- requiremen,t of union-shop authorization ~ opposite tactic and undermine the unipn by resentation e~ists improperly limits its dis- elections ·but keep the provision for de-'· granting more favorable ~t~lemen~s to t,hose cretion. Under the Wag11er ~ct th.e ~oard authorization union-shop elections, retain- · _ employees who pr,esent. ~!leir grievances i~- permitted ce!tification· op a ·check ·of. union Ing the prohibltion· of more than· one such · dlvidually. _ , , . _ _ eards onty where -all parties· agreed and after - ·election per year. . . _, 2. Students of the labor movement unan!- . due notice to the employees ~ in the.· plant "The objections against de-authcirizatiqn . mously rec_ogni_ze · that settlement. of '.gr!ev_-- - gtving th~m an opportunity to qbjec,t.-.- The e\ectiom, is. discussed .under. section -8 (a) · ances is a pri-ncipa:l function of· ;lmions, as holding o:( ·an electi.on .wh~p. ii! _ii?, !10t. de-- . (3);· - - l:P ·. ~~dJt~o1_1 _. it should be npted that. 'mportant as the negotiation of ·the orig~nal mande~ by, any i~tereste:d party is ~ useless · , the _amendment leaves µnclear· .the " status ~ contract. - A contract a~q:uires its. meaning . waste of time 1 and money. - of a cont'ract if a union is de-authorized d.ur- -· through its day-to-day Interpretation in the (.c) . (2) No cl'.\ange: This provisio.n is ing its term. _,. grJevance procedure. closely associated with that part of .section · (f) No change ·in the requirement that 3. The defects of this . section were ana- 10 ( c) which deals-with·distinctions between· unions register and file reports requir~g lyzed ,by Senior Judge :r,.e~rneg · ~and, ~f the affiUated ~nd nonaffiliated -unions. It is dis- finances, bylaws, and other ~atte~s except p:J;,ltted. ~ta_tes court of ~p,Peals in New -York cussed below in connection with that section. (1) a minor amendment requir.ed . by the : .· iq.~ Dq_uds v, R13taj t Stor~ : Union (23 I. R.R. M, . ("c) ·(3) The ":raft amendmf}nt .on t~is_po_il_!t dropping ' of the closea-slio,p auth6rizatlon ' 2424 (1949)). Judge_-Hi,md· noted· that ~ the ~ elilllinates tl).~ e]Cc~usi9_n. of eco~m;x_1ic ~tl':_ik~rs , el,!lcpions;. and_· (2.) . elimi'.riation .oLthe efub- . · pr_9v~ 50 m~y - ~ell cause. -C?on:tusion ,in _•ll;<;i- f:t:om ~ot~ng but qtherw!se pr~_serves , t~~ T~~~ - : · oi:a£e-an-d. unn.ece~sary · requ1remelits of suo- ministration -and intreduce strife between Hartley Act provisin~: i section ' (A) . .(6)' 'o:f'-this . section that · the·' ffv ~i:ui}lfea,d · atteption. __ Tl).1* harassing · n~-twe : ls : • :~ to -us. inescapable terms." ~- In short; Judge . plisheg wi,th9~t ~xpJanaY2n . 9r_ ev_en D:,!~~~~<_?n x;E;lvealed by .senator 'I'AFT's· staterherlf·tnat' g; · ~ '.h Hand "recognized faa~ ' .. tlie provi~9·· ~~ei!ited ~ ~1n - tluyr:µ_ill.?.rity- , reporL . ·,, . ·,,.,' - :/:·~ -::· -p,ropos~ 'that emproyer§tIIe simirar-aata was . strife and confusion in coilective-bargaining ' 2. Th,e requirement of 1 year: between elec.;__ "red~ tape.".. _ " - ' · · - ~ '. - · relations. . . . --- - - ' I tions permits no flexibility a-t, all even where 2 . . N~ explanation is given in tlie minority . (b) (l). No change. Thls ~ection reenacts therEl have been substantial -chang.es in the r~po.rt as to why the cumbersome -provisions the Taft-Hartley provision tnat professional· erriployer's op~ration_s or developments ~ffe_ct- . of section ~ (f) (A) (6) were necessary in . employees.shall not be included in an 'appro:. ing_ r~pres,entation_ ju_sti:flaoly :requiring. re- 1947 but not in ~949. . . _ , - priate bargaining uni.t wt.th. nonprofessional cgn~_i_d~.r~;tion_ of the . q].!e~tion of representa"'. · - (~) _ No ch_~nge ill the i~quiremen! ~ha~ ~e- '" employees ,unl~ss a .majp#ty ·,of, the pro1es- . ~i_o·n . . TJ;l~ : L@oi: _Boarq's : rule under the ports c~ll~~· .foi:_· ip._ _: s~c~i9n, _9_ (!}}_ ~e. fil.. ed . an- . sional ez:npfoye~s .vote in _favor. o{ inclusion. W~gn~r Act, w]1i~}?- . P.rqhibited - elec~i~ms mb~e . , •n,µally. -;!• :r'J;leJ-, co~tP!ll'!~~ . ~age . wit!_l , _r~.s_p~ct -Tiiis provision· ih;terferel u~iily . with. '· a -oft-en-.thjll). .once 8:. ye{llr ~U: · t~ o_rd_i~~ry_' case,. ~ to _ ~ (f) are ~P.P~lc~_blEl' here.· .. . . J'. riiatter whiCh sllouid. b'.e ~ ieft to actxpii\is#a:- permitted sueh flexibility. ·- - - - . · ~·· ': ~ . -(h). The 'raft_9,mendment ·re'ta:ins-the non:: '· t1ve decision . . The· poliCfes of tlie"'Lao6r . .' riie· ~-ye·a.r r~.qiremep,t . is. ' p_a;rttc~a;-Jy . " ~mmunist .aftld,avit requirem:ent: · ~-preserv- :' 1 Board iuadef · tne Wagner Act-disposed of:.Sucn • da~er4~ - :y.o~en .: t~;k~;i.~ ~~:11 ' ~(?~n-~tlon ;~ith .· ing ..all : ~~e ,ei~ll)en~ _of-:< the· oat~ :presently • , problein.s -w-_tli ,deslra-ble'.1',exlllilit'y: ".. _..._· - - the_, p~p~si~n I .fel'J ~~~};9y~r : pet.i~!~l}s ~ !~: .s.... ec _-: · , reql,l~r~~ and. _ad4!J!g a ,: &tat~:nt -.t1'at-. ·tne ; (bj (2) N.o change·. ,' \: ,'. ; .. ';E :;- tiQn-9 <(-c}- Slh.:_By _p_rqP,~ly tigp.~g -h'16_ P~~i- _ ·- person_takirlg· the oaih ~oes not-seek by, force · . (b) (3) The prQvision Qf the 'Taft-Hartley t!on, be..fo.re tlle qnion ·is I!:lady fo~ 0:n .. ~lec- } ?:t: v~olence_ to deny ptller persons their.rights · ~ct fo~·b~ct.diiig. representati"pn qf _g9arj{$'_,and tion, . ~he .empjpyer e~n .- prevent col~e~t!ve. under _tl\e United States Cons~itution . .Sena- mohitorial ~,m.Hlo:y-ees qy,_unionsr ~.l!}lr.es,entipg b~rga1ning , in his pla11t for a ~~a!: " . tor TAf.T enlarge~ tl!e- present .· prov~s_i9ri by · l}.onxp6ni~~ti~1 ".~~p1o~es 'ts , o~itted' )~ · ~he ' -3: -The run-off provision is another arbi- - SR0cifying that the word "officer/' as used in . Taft amendment: · · :! t \, .__ ·' '.-- - ~,.. ,.. - ~- ·· traty ~ll:mitatio:n on a matte-r .which should the requirement that otflcers ~file affidavits . (c) (1) This ·section of the Taft-Hartley be left-to' administrative discretion. ; · - · includes members of all policy forming and . Act provides for employees' representation '. (c) (4) The Taft-Hartli;:y provision per- · governing bodies of the union. elections wheneve~ (a) employee groups -al- mits the waiver of bearings. by . stipulation' -·He·wo.uld add a further sum;ection (9 (h) Iege that a substantial nu'mber of employees for a c~msent election but not the waiving (2) )- requiring -employers, the officers of an · either (i) wish to be represented by a union, of the requirement of an election. Senator employing 'corporation, and all member or (ii) wish to have the currently recog- Taft adds a provision allowing the Board to agents having a responsibility for labor rela- · nized union decertified, or (b) whenever an· hold an election before it. holds a hearing tions to file similar affidavits. employer alleges that a union has requestea· but on:l~ · ~here "i;ro substantial ..o _bJection to 1. -pie problem of na~ional sec~rity ~as · no tec~gn1ticni a5 ' t-he bargtti-ning-agent. , ,. -· · , such proceeding is being made. proper place in a la:bor-managemeiit rela:.. Th·e Taft amendment-makes no change in The propused change is ambiguous. An tions bill . .It is; moreover, dealt with;in other this section other than to remove the pres- objection may be "aubstantial' 'even if 1' legislation, such as that under which the 7644- 'CONGRES-SIONAL "RECORD-SENATE - JUNE 14 leaders 'of the Communist Party are now on (i} Preferred docket for NLRB petitions. procefls, as there modified, is aptly designed trial in New York. No change. Requires petitions for enforce for the enforcement of regulatory statutes. 2. The penalty provided for failure to file ment or review to be handled expeditiously. In part icular it curbs resort to hasty action, th;s non-Gomm unist affidavit is wholly in (j) Injunctions pending Board hearing. even where an agency believes it necessary, appropflate. It is the denial to the union of The only change is for the worse. The un by providing careful rules assurin g due proc 'the right to use the peaceful procedures of limited discretionary power now vested in ess of law and preventin5 action in deroga- the National Labor Relations Board. The re General Counsel Denham to obtain injunc tion of the rights of litigants. . sult is that noncomplying unions are forced tions prior to hearings and immediately All this is abandoned in section 10 ·(j) . to resort to strikes or other economic action. upon issuance of a complaint is transferred One may well imagine the outcry which This does not promote industrial peace, but to the Board. That body is given the added would arise if it were proposed that similar weakens it. An example is the longshore power to obtain temporary restraining or powers be given to all Government agencies. men's strike on the west coast last summer, ders without notice which power is not ex 4. The application of this novel procedure which was precipitated by the employer's pressly given by the Taft-Hartley Act. to the labor-relations field in it self indicates refusal to deal with a noncomplying union. This is one of the worst provisions of the that its purpose is discriminatory. That it 3. In some cases employers seem to have bill. It· imposes government by injunction, is, in fact, aimed at unions alone, even preferred to 'deal with Communist unions be ignores the success of the past decades with fo.ough theoretically applicable also to em cause of their weakness under the act. the administrative process and proposes a p!oyers is shown by the fact that of the 41 4. Instead of taking this issue out of the fantastic commingling of judicial and ad- rrquests for injunctions which have been . labor relations field, the Taft amendment ministrative processes. · made to the courts under the present act, proposes ·to extend the provisions of the act 1. Under this provision, once the Board has 39 have been against unions. Of the 24 in to the members of all union policy forming issued a complaint which is supposed to be junctions granted, only 1 was against an and· governing bodies. This may mean that adjudicated in a Board hearing, the matter employer. is taken before a district court for a hearing all delegates to national conventions, mem The proportion is likely to continue. · bers of all executive boards, members of wage there instead. The court cannot make a The case in which employees are most likely policy committees, shop committees and fair decision as to whether an injunction to benefit from injunctions against an em stewards may be required to file the affidavit. should issue without holding a fair hearing. ployer is that in which the latter has halted Some unions, in order to qualify, will have Yet, in fact, the court cannot give a full an organizing drive in its tracks by dis to file hundreds of thousands of affidavits. hearing because the issue is su,pposed to be charging the top union officials. Yet it is 5. Even on this point the Taft amendment decided by the Board. Hence, in practice it unlikely that the courts will issue an injunc- · ls not mutU'al. Only the officers of the em holds a partial hearing only, and makes its tion requiring reinstatement of such em· ployer and the agents having responsibility decision on affidavits and an incomplete ployees pending Board adjudication of the for the employer's labor relations must file record. The net effect is to enjoin the union propriety of the discharge. the affidavit. The members of the Board of first and hear the facts afterward-to use Dfrectors are exempt and all other policy the injunction and summary contempt 5. Under the Taft amendments, the . Board will decide whether injunctio)'.ls forming-and governing bodies of t~e employer powers of the court to compel a union to are ignored. . . cease practices with which it has merely been should be sought, rather than the general Section 10. Prevention of unfair labor charged and which it has not had any op counsel as at present. This will inevitably practices: portunity to refute. insure political pressure on the Board just as (a) No change, except to delete provision After the injunction is granted, and the it has been on the general counsel, notably authorizing NLRB to cede jurisdiction to Board has held a real rather than a mock the ITU cases. In deciding whether to States. But compare section 6 (b), which hearing, it may decide that the complaint seek an injunction in the thousands of reinserts the provision deleted here. was without merit. The decision will usu cases where it will be demanded the Board (b) No change, except to extend Taft- · ally be a year or more later. Meanwhile, the will ha.ve to act on entirely inadequate in Hartley 6-month statute of limitation with union has been enjoined from engaging in formation. Furthermore, since injunctions respect to the filing of unfair labor practice a lawful activity and its members have been are sought only on the theory that a serious charges to 12 months. This is still an in denied the benefits to which they were en evi~ murt be forestalled, the Board will have ordinately brief period to permit filing of titled under the law. to act in a hurry if it is to act at all. In such a. situation it will be difficult, if not charges. In fact, however, the likelihood of an ob impossible, for it to make its decisions on This section reenacts the objectionable re- · jective decision by the Board is substantially any nbjective standards. quirement that NLRB follow the rules of evi reduced once it has asked for an injunction. dence prevail1ng in the Federal district Having taken the position that a serious situ 7. The Taft amendments add to this sec courts. Practically, unions are thus required ation has arisen requiring extraordinary ju tion a provision already contained in other to assume the expense of retaining attorneys dicial remedies, and having obtained an in P.a~ts of the Taft-Hartley Act subjecting a in almost every case before the Board; par junction against vigorous opposition, it may umon to suit in any judicial district in which ticularly since the NLRB General Counsel has be reluctant to dismiss the complaint. That it has a single org,mizer although its head instituted an "administrative requirement" tendency ll be increased if the district quarters may be located elsewhere and it that charges be supported by competent evi court injunction has been appealed to the may not even have an office in the district. dence establishing a prima facie case within circuit court and there affirmed by the very The employer, on the other hand, may claim 72 hours of filing the charge. court which must review the Board's order. the benefit of the generally applicable venue This tendency, throughout the Taft pro The Board is unlikely to issue a decision statutes requiring that suit be brought in which has the effect, by dismissing the com the judicial district in which the defendant posals, to transform the Board from an ad resides. ministrative agency into a highly technical plaint, of dissolving an injunction approved formal court, naturally makes difficult access by the circuit court even though it knows (k) Jurisdictional disputes: This section to the Board by employees seeking redress that the sustaining of the injunction .was would amend the Taft-Hartley provision for against employer unfair practices. based on an incomplete record. resolving jurisdictional disputes by empow (c) No substantial change. · 2. This provision returns the law of labor ering the Board to refer such matters to 1. NLRB's power to require unions to pay relations to the pre-Norris-La.Guardia days arbitrators if they saw fit, and by setting back-pay awards remains unimpaired. of government by injunction. The whole forth standards for the resolution of such 2. NLRB must decide the case on all the struggle for injunction legislation centered ju~isdictional disputes. The Taft-Hartley evidence,. rather than upon the preponder around the · fact that injunctions granted Ac.; provides that the general counsel may ance of the evidence as under Taft-Hartley. without full hearings can break unions im seem e an injunction in a jurisdictional-dis Cf. section 10 (e) infra, Taft-Hartley's en mediately and that it makes no difference pute case following the procedure set forth larged power of judicial review is apparently that when the union ultimately has its day in the mandatory-injunction section 10 (1). retained, permitting appellate courts to sub in court the injunction is shown to be er The Taft amendments would permit the pro stitute their judgment far that of the NLRB. roneous and is lifted. The damage in such curement of an injunction in a jurisdictional· (d} No change. · cases has already been done. dispute under 10 (j) . (e} No change from Taft-Hartley-which Here the damage is even greater. The The Taft amendments would do nothing, attempted to enlarge power of judicial re "temporary" injunction lasts until the Board however, .toward empowering the Board ac view and invited appellate courts to substi issues its decision a year or more later. tually to resolve jurisdictional disputes. tute their judgment for that of NLRB. Why Probably, also, if the order ls resisted and The Board has now held in four cases that should appellate courts scrutinize NLRB taken to the circuit court for review, the the Taft-Hartley Act does not enable the decisions any more closely than decisions of "temporary" restraint will be continued by Board to resolve jurisdictional disputes, but other agencies? We suggest that Adminis that court under section 10 ( e) . in effect allows ezp.ployers to predetermine trative Procedures Act review provisions be 3. This provision departs radically from the issue of which labor organization shall made fully applicable to NLRB as to other the national policy outlined in the Admin do the work in question. The employer thus agencies. istrative Procedures Act. That statute was has complete discretion to shop around (f) No change. the result of many years of study of the ad among competing unions in order that he (g) No change. ministrative process. It embodies the con · may select that union which will contract (h) No change. clusio:'.l of Congress that the administrative to do the work most cheaply. This Taft- 1949 CONGRESSIONAL-RECORD-. SENATE 7645

Hartley provision is presel'ved in the Taft izations on the ground· that e~perience had· 1. Under the Taft-Hartley Act, as it was amendments. shown that employers did not pursl..le these construed in an opinion of the Department (1) This has been eliminated. suits to final judgment but droppe(l them of Justice, initiation fees and assessments as Section 11. No substantial change.· with the settlement of the labor dispµte out well as dues could be checked off on the basis Section 12. No change. of which they arose. They thus ~dmit. that of individual written assignments. The Section 13. Limitations: This section as this right of action is utilized by employers Taft amendments now would expressly pro serts that nothing in the act, as amended solely for the purpose of harassing unions. hibit the check-off of assessments, fines or by Senator TAFT, except as provided for Industrial peace is not made possible by such penalties even when covered by such written therein shall be construed to diminish the methods. assignments. right to strike. Since the Taft amendments 3. A collective bargaining agreement is not 2. Under Taft-Hartley, it became a prac are a compendium of direct and indirect comparable to the ordinary commercial con tice of many unions to secure individual as restraints upon the right to strike, the hypoc tract, just as a labor union is not compa signment cards which could be revoked by risy of this provision is readily apparent. rable to ·a corporation. Good indlustrial rela the employee during a period of about two Section 14. Supervisors: (a) No change. tions are not promoted by making these con weeks prior to the anniversary of signing, This reenacts a provision of the Taft-Hart tracts the vehicles for damage suits either but which if not revoked during that period, ley Act denying supervisory employees the against unions or. employers. were automatically renewed for another year protection against employer discrimination 4. Any interruption of an employer's pro and thereafter from year to year with similar because of union activity. duction may be claimed to cause, often with withdrawal periods annually. This union (l?J No change. This reenacts the Taft-. out justification, large monetary damage. for practice was approved by the Justice Depart Hartley provision that State laws more hos which unions could be sued under these ment's opinion. The Taft amendments, how tile to unions than the Federal act shall provisions. In contrast, a union exists for ever, are not as clear as they might be on prevail over it even in industries in or. af the purpose of' improving the working con this. .point, although the r-.inority views fecting interstate ·commerce. ·There is no ditions · of its members, -and it is diillcult. fo.r - which accompanied the. Taft. amendments. bona fide justification for this· restrictive a union to demonstrate any comparable contain the statement "the amendment we provision. specific monetary. damage from- employer have' proposed . makes it clear that the au 1. The very purpose of a National Labor breach Of contracts. Thus, while these pro thorization, once given, continues from year Relations Act is to provide a Federal code visions have the appearance of mutuality to year unless revoked by the employee." having uniform application to industrial re and fairness to both sides, the reality is ( c) ( 5} .This section of the Taft amend..: lations in or affecting interstate commerce. otherwise. · ments re-enacts, with changes and elabora It is a part of the u~iform treatment of 5. By reason of the meager monetary re tions, the welfare fund provisions of section commerce among the States, .the institution sources of unions in comparison with -the 302 (c) (5) of the Taft-Hartley Act. The of which was a major reason for calling the large financial resourcf!s of many employers; principal changes include the requirement constitutional convention. To encourage judgments obtained against unions under that tp.e Secretary of Labor, after a thorough State separatism in economic matters is to these provisions may lead to dire results and examination of all the provisions of the destroy the national economic unit which ,. the possible complete destruction Of the' labor agreement creating the welfare fund, includ has been one of our country's greatest organization. ing the holding of a hearing at the req:uest sources of strength. 6. Unions are made suable (by section 16 of any person demonstrating an interest, 2.' This Taft provision invites· States to ( c) ) in any district in wh~ch they have an must certify that the fund meets the stat• encourage industry to "run away" from' other organizer acti11g for employee members; ·utory requirements. ·- States by enacting legislation to discourage This provision goes far beyond the compa - ·i. No necessity for any Federal regulation, unionism. While it is highly desirable that rable provision for suits against corporations of union welfare funds has evifr been shown. regions such as the South be industrialized, and there is no justification for placing this Such fundi;; have7been in exi.stence for years, they should not be industrialized at the ex heavier standard of liability in suits which without the development of any abuses dem pense of industries now located elsewhere, involve the financially weaker- of the two onstrating a need for. regulation. Benefi or by encouraging the relocation of indus types of organization. ciaries of such funds are, of course, protected try from the North to the South. Sweat Section 17. Damage suits: This section re by the normal State laws relating to trusts shop or open-shop industries will in the final enacts, in substance, the provisions of sec and to embezzlement of funds. analysis, do the South no good and will ruin tion 303 of the Taft-Hartley Act giving em 2. The requirement added by the Taft other portions of the country. ployers a right of action in the Federal courts amendments that the Secretary of Labor 3. Senator TAFT uses the pretext of States against unions for damages sustained because must certify that the fund meets the statu rights to justify this provision but shows of certain unfair labor practices involving tory requirements, and hold a hearing, if no real regard for the principle. That is secondary boycotts. requested by any party demonstratin g an in clear· from the fact that the restrictions 1. Despite Senator Taft's alleged devotion terest, is design~d solely to burden unions of the Federal act on union security over to States rights, it is apparent that this Fed and discourage the creation of welfare funds. ride State laws friendly to unions, while eral right of action has been created be Neither employers, employees, or the Secre State laws hostile to unions are given prece cause the States have not seen fit to accord tary of Labor have ever suggested that there dence over the Federal act. · employers such a right. · was any necessity for any such supervision Section 15. No change. 2. Unions and employees are not given any of these funds by the Federal Government. Section 16. Suits by and against labor or comparable right of action for damages The requirement ot submission to the Secre ganizations: No substantial change. These against employers who commit unfair labor tary of Labor, and that hearings be held, provisions of the Taft amendments reenact practices and, obviously, no mutuality of would serve to delay the creation of such the provisions of section 301 of the Taft remedy has been provided. A union may funds and to foster and prolong disputes Hartley Act authorizing suits by and against spend thousands of dollars trying to organ over the terms and administration. of such labor organizations and gives the Federal ize a plant, only to be th.warted by discrim funds. ' courts jurisdiction over suits for violation of inatory discharges and other employer unfair 3. Despite the fact that Senator TAFT and collective bargaining contracts, without re labor practices, but neither the union nor his adherents have always purported to be spect to the amount in controversy or diver a discharged employee is given any right of devoted to economy in government, the Taft sity of citizenship. action to recover damages for the losses in amendments propose · elaborate and expen Strong doubt exists as to whether a breach curred. All that happens is that years later, sive governmental machinery for which there of a labor agreement can constitutionally be after the union has been broken in the is no need and· which neither the adminis made a Federal subject matter regardless of plant, the Board and finally the courts may tration nor anyone else has requested. the amount involved or the diversity of the tell the employt=,?r not to do it again, and pos 4. The statutory standards which welfare _ citizenship of the parties. This novel ex sibly to reinstate an employee who has long funds must meet are confusing and chaoti~ pansion of Federal jurisdiction can more ac since by necessity become ·employed else and, in some instances, impossible of achieve curately be described as an attempt to harass where. ment under existing State law. For example, unions. Section 18. Restrictions on check-off, etc.: many States do not permit the issuance of 1. It is clear that the argument of a devo (a), (b), and (c). Section 18 of the Taft policies of group life or health insurance to tion to States rights which is advanced in amendment re-enacts, with certain altera trustees of a fund of the type required by · support of these provisions is but a flimsy tions, the provisions of section 302 of the Taft-Hartley. Thus, the United Steelworkers pretext for an a·nt.ilabor point of view. The Taft-Hartley Act dealing with the check-off of America reached an agreement with the right of action in the Federal courts against of dues and union welfare funds. MacKenzie Muffler Co. for the creation of unions for breach of bargaining agreements This provision reenacts the Taft-Hartley a welfare fund meeting the requirements of was created by the Taft-Hartley Act and restriction that dues shall be checked off Taft-Hartley, only to find that under -Ohio would be continued by the Taft amendments only on the basis of individual written as law group-insurance policies could be issued for the explicit reason that many States signments received from each employee. only to an employer or a union, but not to have not seen fit to give employers such a That these unnecessary provisions are de trustees representing both parties. Develop right of action. · signed to harass unions is evident from the ments of this sort are to be expected when 2. The Republican majority of the joint two new provisions concerning check-offs elaborate legislation is passed with little con congressional committee justified the provi- which the· Ttlft· amendments add to ·Taft sideration and with no apparent purpose sions authorizing· suits against labor organ- Hartley. except to harass :unions. · 7646 CONGRESSIONAL . RECORD-SENA T.E JUNE 14 5. The provisions of Taft-Hartley with re Act and prior thereto has exposed the use Herman Cooper, general counsel, National spect to the administration of welfare funds lessness, let alone the viciousness, of injunc Maritime Union and Ut111ty Workers Union, have already produced one national emer tions in national emergency labor disputes. CIO. gency strike in the coal industry, because' of Wllliam H. Davis, Chairman of the National Jerome Cooper, counsel for CIO Southern the inability of the union, the management, War Labor Board, in discussing the Taft Organizing Committee. and the impartial umpire to agree. ·· ·Tne Taft Hartley emergency injunction procedure, Leon Despres, general counsel, United amendments would permit the employer. to said: "There has not been a case under the Transport Service Employees, CIO. waive participation in the administration of Taft-Hartley Act in which a settlement has Morris P. Glushien, general counsel, Inter the fund, but, of course, would not compel been reached during the cooling-off period national Ladies' Garment Workers Union, him to do so. Further chaos and contro under an injunction." AFL. versy may be expected by reason of this pro TITLE IV-MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Arthur J. Goldberg, general counsel, Con vision which gives the employer the right to gress of Industrial Organizations and United elect whether or not he desires to partici Section 401. Restriction on political con Steelworkers of America. · pate in· the administration of the welfare tributions: This section reenacts the pro Thomas E. Harris, assistant general cm.in- fUnd. vi::;ions of section 304 of the Taft-Hartley Act sel, CIO. . . TITLE II-CONCILIATION restricting political contributions by unions . The only change is that while Taft-Hartley William J. Isaacson, general counsel, Amal Sections 201-206: These-sections of the Taft gamated Clothing Workers of America, CIO. prohibits u~ions from making a "contribu amendments carry ovei: matter appearing in tion or expenditure" in connection with cer Henry Kaiser, general counsel, American sections 201-205 and 211-212 of the Taft- tain elections, the amended version would Federation of Musicians, AFL. Hartley A9t. _ . . prohibit "contribution" but not "expendi Isadore Katz, general counsel, Textile Specifically, the Federal Mediation and ture." Workers Union of America, CIO. Co"nciliation Service is continued as an in 1. The prohibition of political contribu · Irving J. Levy, general counsel, United dependent agehcy despite pr·e-Taft-Hartley tions by unions is sought to be justifled,on Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Imple- experiences ·indicating that its proper place ment Workers of America., CIO. · · " the ground that the same prohibition app~ies is within the Departme~t of Labor. (Mr. John O'Donnell, general counsel, Transport to corporations. ~ere again labor unions and Bloom believed that the service should re corporations are not properly comparable: Workers Union, CIO. main an independent agency.)' {a) Labor unions are formed to improve Garnet Patterson, general counsel,· United . The removal of the service from the Labor the wages and working conditions of their Rubber Workers, CIO. . . Department under Taft-Hartley did not re members, and political activity.is a legitimate Joseph B. Rol:?lson, attorn~y. . atilt 'from any•'derilonstrated defects in the and even indispensable part of their func Louis . Sb.erman, general counsel, ~nterna function of the service, nor has any improve tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, ment in the functioning of the service re tion. That, of course, is not true of corpo AFL. . rations. sulted from the removal. Jerome Sturm and Alan Perl, general coun The Hoover Commission's recently pub {b) Labor unions are not so wealthy that political contributions by unions would sels, National Association of Machinists, In lished recommendations clearly indicate the dependent. ad:vi&ability of reestablishing . the service threaten the purity of elections, while corpo rations have amassed such enormous wealth Gerhard P. Van Arkel, general counsel, withill the Department, viz, (1) "The nu I~ternational Typographical Union, ,fJi'L.. that if they were free to make political con 1 merous agencies of the executive branch Lindsay Walden, general counsel, Oil Work; must be .grouped into departments as nearly tributions the purity of elections would be imperiled. The financial strength of most ers International Union, CIO. as possible .by major purposes in order to ' L. N. D. Wells, Jr. (firm of Mullinax, Welis give. a coherent mission to each department, unions ls no greater than that of many indi viduals who are, of course, free to make po & Ball), general counsel, Texas State Fede-f- and, (2) there must be a clear line of. au a tion of Labor, AFL. · thority reaching down through every step litical contributions. 2. Senator TAFT apparently seeks to re Woll, Glenn & Thatcher, general counsel, of the organization, and no subordinate American Federation of Labor. ·;· should have authority . independent from strict union political activity by creating un that of his superior." certainty as to what is permissible under his MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE-ENROLLED Section 207. No change. bill. Thus, the minority report (p. 63), goes BILLS SIGNED. out of its way to .express the belief that TITLE III-NATIONAL EMERGENCIES "contributions" · cover those expenditures A message from the· H01,1se ·of 'Repre Sections 301-307: These sections of the which are in substance indirect contribu sentatives, by Mr. Maurer, one of its Taft amendments deal with national emer tions to a particular candidate . .Harassment reading clerks, announced.. that the gencies and replace sections 206-210 of the by vagueness is hardly a legitimate form of Speaker pro tempore had ·affixed his sig Taft-Hartley Act. Senator TAFT'S proposal legislation. nature to the following enrolled .pills, for dealing with national emergencies is Section 402. Strikes by Government em and they were signed by the Vice Presi- even more objectionable than the Taft ployees: This section preserves without dent: · ·· Hartley provisions. change section 305 of the Taft-Hartley Act, 1. The Taft amendments permit· the which makes it unlawful for any person em S. 1125. An act to amend section 16-415 President to seek an injunction immediately ployed by the United States to participate in of the Code of Laws of the Distrfct of ' co~um after issuance by him of a proclamation with any strike. The issue with which this pro bia, to provide for the enforcement of '<::o~rt out awaiting the report of the Emergency vision deals is part .of a larger and a very orders for the payment of temporary' ·and :Board as was required under the Taft-Hartley difficult proble~ which ~eeds further con permanent maintenance in the same' man Act. sideration by Congress. For example: ner as directed to enforce· orders for· perma 2. Although the Taft amendments em 1. Consideration should be given to mak nent alimony; power the President to apply to a court either ing some provision for the settlement of dis S. 1129. An act to amend section 16-416 for seizure or for an injunction or both, {a) putes between the Government and its em of the Code of Laws of the District of Colum the absence of provisions defining the terms ployees, such as machinery for collective bar bia, to conform to the nomenclature and of seizure, (b) the failure to spell out what gaining and for the processing of grievances practice prescribed by the Federal Rules· of shall happen to profits, and (c) the provision of Government employees. Civil Procedure; - · which prohibits the Government from nego 2. The Federal Government engages in nu S. 1131. An act to amend sections 260, 267, tiating with the union for a settlement of merous activities, many of which are of a 309, 315, 348, 350, and 361 of the act entitled the dispute, indicates that only token, not proprietary rather than of a governmental "An act to establish a code of law for the real, seizure, is contemplated. character. Persons employed in enterprises District of Columbia,'' approved March 3, 3. The fact that the President must apply of the former type, such as TV A, may bear 1901, to provide that estates of decedents to a district judge for authority to seize no different relation to the community than being administered within the probate court a plant in a situation proclaimed by the do persons employed in private industry. A may be settled at the election of the per Chief Executive to be a national emergency blanket prohibition to strike, particularly sonal represent ative of the decedent in that rather than doing so directly, makes it pos when unaccompanied by any provision for court 6 months after his qualification · as sible for a court to find that the circum collective bargaining or processing of griev such personal representative; stances do not warrant even token seizure. ances, seems wholly unwarranted as to such S. 1132. An act to amend section 137 of 4. The provision which prohibits the Gov employees. the act entitled "An act to establish a code ernment from negotiating with the employer Section 403. Definitions: No ct.ange from of law for the District of Columbia,"_ ap or the' union for a settlement of the dispute section 501 of Taft-Hartley. proved March 3, 1901, relating t o the time frustrates collective bargaining for the entire Section 405. Saving provision: No change within which a caveat may be filed to a 60-day period t.nd furnishes incentive to the from section 502 of Taft-Hartley. will after the will has been probated; employer not to bargain with t he union. Section 406. Separability: No change from S. 1133. An act to amend section 16-418 The amendments, like the Taft-Hartley Act, section 503 of Taft-Hartley. of the Code of Laws of the District of Colum delay and stult ify collective bargaining; they bia, to provide that an attorney be appointed do not advance collective bargaining. · Lester Asher (firm of Daniel Carmell, gen by the court to defend all uncontested an 5. The language and structure of the Taft eral counsel, Illinois and Chicago Federation nulment cases; amendments reveal only too plainly that their of Labor, AFL). S. 1135. An act to amend the act entitled proponents still rely upon injunctions even Frank Bloom, general counsel, Commercial "An act to establish a code of law for the though experience under the Taft-Hartley Telegrap:2ers Union, AFL. Distr,ict of Columbia," approved March 3, 1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 7647 1901, to provide a family allowance and a ever ills existed in the field of labor country up a blind alley of litigation, simplified procedure · in the settlement of management relations and, at the same uncertainty, domestic strife, and reac small estates; ancl time, would develop a spirit of mutual· s. 1557. An act to provide for the appoint tion," and that "by weakening the pur ment of an additional judge for the juvenile respect, understanding, and cooperation chasing power and economic position of court of the District of Columbia. between labor and management. the great mass of consumers it would Today, again, this same group, aug hurry us along the road to a dangerous NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT OF mented in the meantime by new arrivals depression." A week later I placed in 1949 from the field, are all taking a hand in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a statement The Senate resumed the consideration the matter, with great hopes that this of the National Catholic Welfare Con of the bill