DOCSLIB.ORG

National Labor Relations Board 1936

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Labor Relations Board 1936 FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD FOR THE FISC,AL YEAR ENDED JAE SO 1936 FIRST ANNUAL REPOR.T OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD For the Fiscal Year Ended June -30; -1936 PROPERTY t.A4....1 !...111‘,/ 1 44 I NATiONI-0 KARL, UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE cP■ WASHINGTON 1936 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. - - - - Price 15 cents NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD J. WARREN MADDEN, Chairman. JOHN M. CARMODY. EDWIN S. SMITH. BENEDICT WoLir, Secretary. BEATRICE M. STERN, A88i8tant Secretary. CHARLES FART, General CaUn8d. ROBERT B. WATTS, Associate General Counsel. NATHAN WITT, Assistant General Counsel. DAVID J. SAPOSS, Chief Industrial Economist. MALcoLat Ross, Director' of Publications. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D. C., January 41 1937. SIR: I have the honor to submit to you the First Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Board, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1936, in compliance with the provisions of section 3 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, approved July 5, 1935. J. WARREN MADDEN, Chairman. The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, The SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. Predecessor Boards 4 A. National Labor Board 4 B. The First National Labor Relations Board 5 C. Other boards 7 III. The National Labor Relations Act 9 A. Legislative history 9 B. Policy and provisions 9 1. Findings and policy 10 • 2. The Board 10 3. Rights of employees 10 4. Representatives and elections 11 5. Jurisdiction 11 6. Procedure 11 7. Penalties 12 IV. The National Labor Relations Board 14 A. The Board 14 B. Organization—Washington office 11 C. Organization—Regional offices 16 D. Regional offices—Location, territory, and personnel 17 V. Procedure of the Board 18 A. Rules and regulations 18 • 1. Procedure under section 10 of the act 18 2. Procedure under section 9 (c) of the act 25 VI. Work of the Board 29 A. Statistical summary 29 B. Settlements 31 C. Informal activities 32 D. Cooperation with Senate investigation 32 VII. Complaint cases 33 A. Analysis of charges received 33 B. Disposition of complaint cases 34 1. Cases closed before issuance of complaint 34 2. Cases disposed of after issuance of complaint 35 3. Cases pending 37 C. Hearings and intermediate reports 38 VIII. Representation cases 40 A. Disposition of cases received 40 1. Cases closed before hearing 40 2. Cases closed after hearing 41 3. Cases pending 41 B. Elections 41 IX. Litigation 46 A. Injunction proceedings 46 B. Enforcement litigation 50 C. Miscellaneous ligitation 51 D. Comments. 55 X. Division of Economic Research 60 XI. Publications Division 67 A. Public relations problems • 67 B. Board policy in its public relations 68 C. Activities of Publications Division 69. XII. Principles established 70 A. Interference, restraint, and coercion in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 7 of the act 70 VI CONTENTS XII. Principles established—Continued page B. Discrimination for the purpose of encouraging or discouraging membership in a labor organization 77 1. Discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employ- ment 77 2. Discriminatory refusal to reinstate employees after a shut-down, lock-out, or strike 81 3. Discrimination in regard to any term or condition of employment 83 4. The closed shop" proviso 84 C. Collective bargaining 84 I. Provisions of the act relative to collective bargaining 84 2._ The duty to bargain collectively 84 (a) The elements of bargaining • 85 (b) The requirement of good faith 86 (c) Collective bargaining distinguished from ad- justment of individual grievances 87 (d) Bargaining with individual employees 88 3. The majority rule 88 (a) Exclusive representation 88 (b) Determination of majority 89 4. Fulfillment of the duty to bargain 91 5. Duty to bargain where there is a strike 93 D. Domination and interference with the formation or adminis- tration of a labor organization and contribution of finan- cial or other support to it 94 E. Investigation and certification of representatives 102 1. Certification with or without election 103 2. The existence of a question concerning representation 104 3. Direction of election 106 (a) Date on which eligibility of voters is deter- mined 106 (b) The period within which the election is directed to be held 107 (c) Form of the ballot 107 4. Majority rule 108 5. Election or certification during existence of contract 108 6. Jurisdictional disputes 109 F. The unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining 112 1. History of labor relations in the industry and between the employer and his employees 113 2. Skill 114 3. Functional coherence 115 4. Mutual interest 116 5. Wages 117 6. Organization of employers business 117 7. Form of self-organization among employees 118 8. Eligibility to membership in labor organization 119 G. Administrative remedies 120 1. Provisions of the act governing orders 120 2. Types of orders issued by the Board 120 (a) Orders requiring employers to cease and desist from engaging in unfair labor practices 120 (b) Orders requiring employers to take affirmative action which will effectuate the policies of the act__ 124 XIII. Jurisdiction 135 A. Types of cases considered, in general 135 B. Unfair labor practices as a prime cause of labor disputes__ 137 C. Effect of labor disputes on interstate and foreign commerce_ _ _ 138 XIV. List of cases heard and decisions rendered_ 147 XV. Fiscal affairs 150 FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD I. INTRODUCTION The National Labor Relations Board was created not as a com- pletely new experiment in the field of labor relations but as a result of the cumulative experience of many years during which various ways to deal with labor relations had been tried by the Federal Government. From this experience was evolved the plan incorpo- rated in the National Labor Relations Act in the field of interstate commerce. A brief account of this history may be useful. The first role of the Federal Government in the field of labor re- lations was that of a military preserver of the peace in strike areas where local and State governmental agencies claimed to be unable to control the violence incident to specific strikes. Many calls were made upon the Federal Government for intervention in such circum- stances, and frequently the Federal Government responded. Although this intervention resulted in bitter protests by labor organizations, it evoked no complaint from industry against governmental interfer- ence. The Federal Government, through its courts, also intervened in this field. The increasingly frequent use of injunctions against strikers, obtained by employers, was a source of constant complaint by the unions, but again the employers had no objection to this par- ticular form of Federal intervention. It was in the railroad industry that the Government first began to play the role it has now adopted for other industries in which a strike would interrupt interstate commerce. In 1888 Congress passed a statute applying to the railroad industry providing for the investi- gation, by a Commission consisting of the United States Commis- sioner of Labor and two other people to be appointed by the Presi- dent for each dispute, of labor disputes threatening to interrupt in- terstate commerce, and for arbitration. The parties did not avail themselves of this law and it became a dead letter. In 1898 the Erd- man Act was passed, providing for temporary boards to be appointed to mediate and conciliate disputes, and providing also for voluntary arbitration. No provision was made for investigations. In 1913 the Newlands Act was passed, establishing a Board of Mediation and Conciliation to settle labor disputes in the railroad industry. This Board had the power to render opinions as to the meaning and application of agreements which had been arrived at by the process of mediation, but whose interpretation was in dispute. The act also contained provisions for arbitration. In 1920 an act was passed setting up a tripartite board, com- posed of representatives of labor, industry and the public, to hear 1 , A FIRST ANNUAL REPORT , ' • c all disputes which thell. ties could not settle in conference. This board could render decisioris. but the parties were not compelled to comply with the boards orders. The Railway Labor Act of 1926 made it mandatory upon the railroads and the employees to exert every reasonable effort to make and maintain agreements through representatives chosen by each party, free from interference by the other. A board for the purpose of mediation of disputes was also established. This act was amended in 1934, but its essential princi- ples remained unchanged. The employees under this act, are pro- tected in their right of self-organization free from the interference of the employers. This summary review of legislation affecting the railroad industry makes it apparent that the entrance of the Federal Government into labor disputes for the purpose of protecting the right of employees to self-organization and collective bargaining, is not a novel thing. As early as 1876 the Federal Government conducted investigations of labor relations. In 1882 the Senate, by resolution, directed the Committee on Education and Labor to undertake a study of labor disputes inquire into their causes, and to recommend suitable legis- lation. Four' subsequent commissions made extensive inquiries into the problem—the Industrial Commission of 1898, the Anthracite Coal Commission of 1902, the United States Commission on Indus- trial Relations of 1912, and President Wilsons Industrial Conferences of 1919. The first three of these were authorized by acts of Congress. In 1884 the Government formed the Bureau of Labor, and through this medium and through special commissions it intervened in dis- putes between employers and employees.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SUPREME COURT DECISIONS on LABOR, 1948-49 by Betty Jane Swoboda* * Research Assistant, Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations
    L I E> RAR.Y OF THE UN IVERSITY or ILLINOIS 331.1 vvo. \-2.5 INSTITUTE OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON LABOR. 1948-49 N I V E R S I T EDITORIAL NOTE The Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations was established in 1946 to "inquire faithfully, honestly, and impartially into labor-manage- ment problems of all types, and secure the facts which will lay the foundation for future progress in the whole field of labor relations." The Institute seeks to serve all the people of Illinois by promoting general understanding of our social and economic problems, as well as by providing specific services to groups directly concerned with labor and industrial relations. The Bulletin series is designed to implement these aims by periodi- cally presenting information and ideas on subjects of interest to persons active in the field of labor and industrial relations. While no effort is made to treat the topics exhaustively, an attempt is made to answer the main questions raised about the subjects under discussion. The presenta- tion is non-technical for general and popular use. Additional copies of this Bulletin and others listed on the last page are available for distribution. W. Ellison Chalmers Milton Berber Acting Director Coordinator of Research Dorothy Dowell Editor I.L.I.R. PUBLICATIONS, BULLETIN SERIES, VOL. 4, NO. 1 (formerly Series A) UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BULLETIN Volume 47, Number 54; March, 1950. Published seven times each month by the Unive-- sity of llliniiis. Entered as second-class matter December 11, 1912, at the post ofifice at TTr'bana.
    [Show full text]
  • Members-Only Collective Bargaining: a Back-To-Basics Approach to Union Organizing
    Upjohn Institute Press Members-Only Collective Bargaining: A Back-to-Basics Approach to Union Organizing Charles J. Morris Southern Methodist University Chapter 12 (pp. 251-274) in: Justice on the Job: Perspectives on the Erosion of Collective Bargaining in the United States Richard N. Block, Sheldon Friedman, Michelle Kaminski, Andy Levin, eds. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 2006 DOI: 10.17848/9781429454827.ch12 Copyright ©2006. W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. All rights reserved. 12 Members-Only Collective Bargaining A Back-to-Basics Approach to Union Organizing Charles J. Morris Southern Methodist University My purpose and concern in this chapter is to call attention to a criti- cal missing link in the U.S. system of industrial relations. That link is members-only minority-union collective bargaining, which is a natural preliminary stage in the development of mature, majority-based exclu- sivity bargaining. What follows is an abbreviated version of some of the key elements of that thesis, which is more fully developed in my recent book, The Blue Eagle at Work: Reclaiming Democratic Rights in the American Workplace.1 Minority-union bargaining was commonly prac- ticed immediately before and after enactment of the Wagner Act2 (the National Labor Relations Act) in 1935, and as I demonstrate in that book, it was not Congress’ intent to deny protection to such bargaining under that act. During the early years following its passage, such bargaining prevailed widely. The decisive provisions of the act, which were not af- fected by either the Taft-Hartley3 or Landrum-Griffin4 amendments, are still fully in effect today.
    [Show full text]
  • FOIA Logs for US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for CY 2007
    Description of document: FOIA CASE LOGS for: US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for CY 2007 Requested date: 12-November-2007 Released date: 31-December-2007 Posted date: 22-January-2008 Title of Document National Labor Relations Board Legal Research and Policy Planning From: 01/01/2007 To: 12/13/2007 Date/date range of document: 02-January-2007 – 28-September-2007 Source of document: FOIA Officer National Labor Relations Board 1099 14th Street, N.W., Room 10600 Washington, D.C. 20570 Fax: (202) 273-4275] The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL FREEDOM OF INFORMAnON OFFICE Washington, D.C. 20570 DATE: December 31,2007 Re: FOIA ID/LR-2008-0082 This is our final response to your letter dated November 12, 2007, received in this Office on November 14, 2007, in which you request, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), a "copy of the FOIA Case Logs for the NLRB for the time period FY2006 and FY2007 to the present." In a subsequent telephone conversation with a member of my staff, you modified your request to include only results from January 1, 2007, to the present, and to exclude the address of the requester.
    [Show full text]
  • None Dare to Call It Treason
    The Origin of Communism* Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing political and social order of things. The communists disdain to conceal their aims. Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite! – Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto The story of communism is a story of contradictions. Despite Marx’s call for the workers of the world to unite, communism has never been a working class movement. Its strength is in the intellectual and thought centers of the world. Communism is commonly believed to rise out of poverty. Yet Fidel Castro was a product, not of the cane fields of Cuba, but of the halls of Havana University. Joseph Stalin was not a simple peasant rebelling at the oppression of the Czar. He became a communist while studying for the priesthood in a Russian Orthodox seminary. Dr. Cheddi Jagan, communist premier of British Guiana, became a communist, not as an “exploited” worker on a plantation of a British colonial colony, but as a dental student at Chicago’s Northwestern University. The membership of the first Communist spy ring uncovered in the U.S. Government was not spawned in the sweat shops of New York’s lower east side or the tenant farms of the South. Alger Hiss, Nathan Witt, Harry Dexter White, Lee Pressman, John Abt, Lauchlin Currie and their comrades came to high government posts from Harvard Law School. The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee’s Handbook for Americans delves into why people become Communists.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the National Conference for Labor Legislation
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FRANCES PERKINS, Secretary BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS ISADOR LUB1N, Commissioner BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES \ CO O BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS f * * * * WO. OOO LABOR LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES SERIES PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR LABOR LEGISLATION HELD AT WASHINGTON, D.C. FEBRUARY 14 AND IS, 1934 / UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON i 1934 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. - Price 10 cents Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONTENTS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14—MORNING SESSION Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor of the United States, Presiding Page Address of the Secretary of Labor____________________________________ 1 Safety and health protection in industry— discussion__________________ 5 Robert J. Watt, of Massachusetts. Elmer Andrews, of New York. Frances Perkins, of Washington, D.C. Workmen ’& compensation— discussion________________________________ Frances Perkins, of Washington, D.C. Thomas J. Donnelly, of Ohio. Wendell Heaton, of Florida. H. R. McLogan, of Wisconsin. Child labor— discussion______________________________________________ 14 Grace Abbott, of Washington, D.C. Courtenay Dinwiddie. of New York. Joseph M. Tone, of Connecticut. Claude S. Carney, of Michigan. Edwin S. Smith, of Massachusetts. John L. Barry, of New Hampshire. John A. Phillips, of Pennsylvania. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14—AFTERNOON SESSION Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor of the United States, Presiding Appointment of committees__________________________________________ 19 Limitation of hours of work—discussion_______________________________ 19 Edwin S. Smith, of Massachusetts. Rev. Francis J. Haas, of Washington, D.C. F. E. Hatchell, of South Carolina. Frances Perkins, of Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms International
    INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyriglited materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Labor Movement and the Fair Labor Standards Act
    FairFair Labor Labor Standards Standards Act Act Troubled passage: the labor movement and the Fair Labor Standards Act Historical events show that oppositions within the labor movement had prolonged passage of legislation relating to minimum wages and maximum hours, contained in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 Howard D. Samuel or most observers, the issue of statutory next to the Social Security Act it is the most im- labor standards is inalterably linked to the portant Act that has been passed in the last two Flabor movement. And indeed it has been, to three years.”1 But it took three sessions of starting early in the 19th Century when the earli- Congress and a monumental effort by the bill’s est efforts to enact maximum hours legislation took supporters to get it passed, in no small reason, place at the State level, to the year 2000, when because of the divisions within the labor move- raising the minimum wage was once again on the ment—which this article explores. Congressional agenda. Organized labor has played a significant role in supporting the improve- The early years ment of labor standards for all of this century and a half—with one exception—minimum wages for For almost a century, prior to passage of the Fair male workers imposed and enforced by the Fed- Labor Standards Act, there had been efforts at eral Government. Starting in 1937, when wage and the State level to enact restrictions on the hours hour legislation was proposed to apply to all of work—particularly for women and children.
    [Show full text]
  • Interest Group Politics and the Wagner Act Keri Jorgenson University of Washington - Tacoma Campus, [email protected]
    University of Washington Tacoma UW Tacoma Digital Commons PPPA Paper Prize Politics, Philosophy and Public Affairs 2017 Labor Law for Whom? Interest Group Politics and the Wagner Act Keri Jorgenson University of Washington - Tacoma Campus, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tacoma.uw.edu/ppe_prize Recommended Citation Jorgenson, Keri, "Labor Law for Whom? Interest Group Politics and the Wagner Act" (2017). PPPA Paper Prize. 9. https://digitalcommons.tacoma.uw.edu/ppe_prize/9 This Undergraduate Research Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Politics, Philosophy and Public Affairs at UW Tacoma Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in PPPA Paper Prize by an authorized administrator of UW Tacoma Digital Commons. Labor Law for Whom? Interest Group Politics and the Wagner Act Keri Jorgenson University of Washington Tacoma Jorgenson 2 Labor Law for Whom? Interest Group Politics and the Wagner Act The era of the Great Depression and President Roosevelt’s ensuing New Deal is a subject of history that has fascinated scholars and the American public alike. During this time, several important pieces of legislation as well as new federal programs and agencies that were designed to aid in the restoration of the economy were developed. These major changes broke with recent American political history and resulted in an unprecedented expansion of state power. Both the skillful leadership of President Roosevelt and the dominance of the Democrats after their landslide victory in 1934 are often focused on for their roles in the political shift. Yet closer examination proves that their leadership and the resulting changes were very complicated.
    [Show full text]
  • The NLRB's Uncertain Future the National Labor Relations Board in Comparative Context: Introduction, 26 Comp
    Fordham Law School FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History Faculty Scholarship 2004 Isolated and Politicized: The NLRB's Uncertain Future The aN tional Labor Relations Board in Comparative Context: Introduction James J. Brudney Fordham University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Administrative Law Commons, and the Labor and Employment Law Commons Recommended Citation James J. Brudney, Isolated and Politicized: The NLRB's Uncertain Future The National Labor Relations Board in Comparative Context: Introduction, 26 Comp. Lab. L. & Pol'y. J. 221 (2004-2005) Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/136 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ISOLATED AND POLITICIZED: THE NLRB'S UNCERTAIN FUTURE James J. Brudneyt INTRODUCTION For an agency that presides over a dwindling domain, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or "Board") has generated a fair amount of heat in recent times.1 Since the start of 2004, the Board has issued a remarkable series of decisions weakening the rights of workers to engage in organizing and collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA" or "Act"). 2 These decisions invariably have been authored by appointees of President Bush and typically have been accompanied by an angry or despairing dissent.
    [Show full text]
  • Whittaker Chambers Testifies" Carroll County Times Article for 16 August 1998 by Jay A
    "Whittaker Chambers Testifies" Carroll County Times article for 16 August 1998 By Jay A. Graybeal In August 1948, Whittaker Chambers, A Time magazine editor who lived on a farm on Bachman's Valley Rd. in Carroll County, read a prepared statement charging that a number of government officials were communists. The story was published in the August 6 issue of the Westminster Democratic Advocate newspaper: "FORMER COMMUNIST TESTIFIES BEFORE COMMITTEE Whitaker Chambers, living on Bachman's Valley road, on the Thomas farm, who said he was a Communist from 1924 to 1937 testified Tuesday that the Red 'underground' then included Alger Hiss, State Department official, before the House of Un-American Activities Committee, in Washington on Tuesday. Chambers, now an associate editor of Time magazine, said in a prepared statement read to the House committee that he himself 'served in the underground, chiefly in Washington.' He said there was an underground organization developed, to the best of his knowledge, by Harold Ware, one of the sons of the Communist leader known as 'Mother Bloor.' He went on: 'I knew it at its top level, a group of seven or so men, from among whom, in the late years, certain members of Miss (Elizabeth T.) Bentley's organization were apparently recruited.' 'The head of the underground group was Nathan Witt, an attorney for the National Labor Relations Board. Later John Abt became the leader. 'Lee Pressman was also a member of this group, as was Alger Hiss, who, as a member of the State Department, later organized the conferences at Dumbarton Oaks, San Francisco and the United States side of the [Y]alta Conference.' Miss Bentley, mentioned by Chambers, is the young woman who told a sensational story last week of collecting information for the Russians from scores of Government employees during the war.
    [Show full text]
  • This PDF Is a Selection from an Out-Of-Print Volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Ebb and Flow in Trade Unionism Volume Author/Editor: Leo Wolman Volume Publisher: NBER Volume ISBN: 0-87014-029-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/wolm36-1 Publication Date: 1936 Chapter Title: Unions Under the Recovery Administration Chapter Author: Leo Wolman Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c2755 Chapter pages in book: (p. 43 - 75) CHAPTER V Unions Under the Recovery Administration persistent decline in union membership, which began in 1921 and was interrupted oniy nominally in 1927, ended in 1933. Within the following year the number of union members in- creased over 600,000. Membership in 1934 was thus restored to almost the level of 1923, in the post-War period, and to above that of 1918, during the War. The recorded gain in this single year almost equalled the total loss in the decade 1923—33,, and it exceeded the entire decline' during the recent depression. Final membership data for the next year, 1935, are not at this time available; hut preliminary figures indicate that the advance has continued, though at a considerably slower rate. The causes of these recent changes in unionism are, against the background of the history of organized labor in this country, of more than passing interest. Although the downward trend of busi- ness activity and employment was unmistakably reversed 'about the middle of 1933 and the upward movement has continued with brief interruptions since, the gains in union membership cannot be ascribed mainly to the effects of the forces of industrial re- covery.
    [Show full text]
  • Catholic Social Reform and the New Deal
    Catholic Social Reform and the New Deal _Ae Ya<&ewf o_cWofiX _W'fawz 5 §a aer2 OJz9lO/ c/a~ Ja ON OCTOBER 8, 1936, Monsignor John A. Ryan urged millions of to process the Ryan and Haas Papers. The grant also provided listeners to his nationally broadcast radio speech to reject the funds to process the papers of Catholic labor leaders Philip advice of fellow Catholic cleric Father Charles Coughlin and Murray and John Brophy, and the Congress of Industrial Organi- vote for President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the upcoming elec- zations Records. tion.The Democratic National Committee had prodded a reluc- John A. Ryan was the most prolific, well known, and impor- tant Ryan to step into the fray of national politics because it tant Catholic social reform advocate and theorist in America be- feared that Catholic voters might be swayed by Coughlin's tween the time of his first published book in 1906, A Living weekly insistence that FDR was a communist who no longer de- Wage, and his death in 1945. His economic and political phi- served the support of Catholics. Coughlin, the famous radio losophies were initially grounded in his experiences as the eld- priest and demagogue of the 1930s who was on his way to est child in a large Irish-Catholic farm family. Born in Minnesota being an ignoble anti-Semite, had recently turned violently in 1869, he witnessed firsthand the difficult plight of small farm- against Roosevelt. ers and supported the populist movement as a young man. Ryan's speech, "Roosevelt Safeguards America," was the most Ryan entered the St.
    [Show full text]