Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

need a very efficient, modern merchant service, with proper proportions, as auxiliaries.

The CHAIRMAN. When you say that they need it, do you mean it is absolutely essential!

Rear Admiral WILEY. Absolutely essential to the proper performance or the proper use of the Navy in time of emergency. You cannot get along without it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do we have enough ships under the American flag today, to render that auxiliary service?

Rear Admiral WILEY. We do not have enough modern ships; we are very deficient in that respect.

The CHAIRMAN. We have 417,000 tons of all sizes of merchant ships under 10 years of age, and that is all we have.

Rear Admiral Wiley. Of course that includes all sizes, and ships of varying tonnages.

The CHAIRMAN. However, the total is only 41 ships.
Rear Admiral WILEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. While the British have 704 ships, Germany 132, Japan 115, France 64, Italy 42, and the United States 41.

Then, as regards tonnage, the British have 4,407,000 tons; Germany, 947,000; Japan, 740,000; France, 500,000; Italy, 433,000; and the United States, 417,000—one-tenth of the British strength.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. If our Navy is equal to the British Navy in tonnage but our merchant marine is only one-tenth of the British merchant marine, is that difference great enough to make our Navy less effective than the British Navy?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Speaking as a merchant marine commissioner, I prefer not to give any expert opinion on that.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. Would we have competition with the transport service, in getting ships, in case we should have a large task to do again? The Army also needs transports, of course.

Rear Admiral Wiley. Yes. And they are very badly off, so far as transports are concerned.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. So if we went to war tomorrow, we would have to make as many mistakes' as we made during the World War, in view of that situation?

Rear Admiral Wiley. We would have to have many more ships.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. And that would mean that we would probably get emotional and build more ships?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Very likely.

The CHAIRMAN. One of our difficulties today is that we built poor ships during the World War, and now we are having difficulty getting rid of them or trying to use them.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. During the World War, those of us who saw the mobilization in its various phases, and then in later years the bringing together of the C. C. C. camps, learned that so far as the Army is concerned, they have actually learned something, whether they know it or not, as the result of the war, in the way of handling and organizing men. Could we say the same of the Navy and Coast Guard and other marine organizations? Could we do a job today, comparatively as much better as the job the Army did in connection with the setting up of the C. C. C. camps, do you believe?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Well, I should think we should; we are not very good if we could not.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. We have increased personnel efficiency, hare we?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Oh, undoubtedly we have, I think. I think the Navy's personnel efficiency is becoming greater all the time. Of course, I have been out of the active service for 9 years; but that is my belief of the situation.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. Could you say that for our merchant marine, too?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Today!
Senator THOMAS of Utah. Yes; comparatively speaking?
Rear Admiral Wiley. No; I would not say that. No, sir.
Senator THOMAS of Utah. It has not kept up the pace?

Rear Admiral Wiley. No. I think a great many good seamen have left the sea.

And in that connection, it seems to me that we need to consider the officers as well as the seamen. I do not think the officers are up to the mark. There is so much division of authority, you know, that no one agency is responsible for these things and for the efficieney; and consequently the situation is not good. That is always. the case where there is divided authority or lack of authority.

The CHAIRMAN. It is all rather haphazard, is it not?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Yes; rather bad. I am glad you asked that question. Because I think that even though we do this training in both parts, as I have suggested, unless we do away with these private hiring halls, we are not going to make the progress that we should.

It was the same when the owners had these hiring halls, you know. Now that the seamen have the hiring halls, it is just as bad. There is always bitterness and you are not going to have discipline unless you have some decent feeling, unless your relationships are decent.

Speaking as a naval officer, experience in going to sea was about the only thing I knew, when I was in the service. And at sea, discipline is not based on carrying out or exercising authority under harsh laws. The discipline in the Navy is based on a decent understanding and fine relationship between the men and the officers.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. Is not that the case in every walk of life? Rear Admiral WILEY. It should be.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. And even in the Army, does not discipline fall down if you do not have that?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Of course. I am only speaking for the Navy, but I take it for granted that the Army is the same.

But that condition does not exist in the merchant service. It is not the fault of the men any more than it is of the owners. The officers are placed in a very, very undesirable position; because they never know whether the owners are going to support them or not, if they have to take rather severe measures.

The CHAIRMAN. They are inclined to think that the owners are not going to support them, are they?

Rear Admiral Wiley. Sometimes they have every reason to believe that they will not.

[ocr errors]

Now, we have authority to do a great deal toward making the owners more tolerant and sensible and less stupid; but we do not have any authority to do anything about either the licensed or the unlicensed personnel. I think we should have that authority. I think all the functions that pertain to the seagoing personnel should come under the authority of the Maritime Commission. It is charged with responsibility for seeing that we acquire a modern, efficient merchant marine, manned by trained and efficient personnel. Of course, that means a disciplined personnel. But we do not have any authority whatsoever to do anything other than see that the sailor comes into his own. But we cannot do anything toward discipling him. And when I say "the sailor," that term includes the masters and the officers.

The CHAIRMAN. Admiral, you spoke about the hiring halls. The navigation laws are very specific in placing the responsibility for the selection and providing of personnel upon the shipping commissioners, are they not?

Rear Admiral WILEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. But in these contracts which are being made between the C. I. O. and the various shipping companies, the hiring hall is recognized, and dependence is placed upon it for supplying the men. In short, the owners have consented to waiving the law; and they have no right to do that, when they make a contract. But the result of the system, as I understand it, is this: While it is denied by the unions that they want the strict rotation system, the fact remains that actually they are using a kind of rotation. Therefore the shipmaster or the ship company are no longer sure they can retain men who have been with them for years; they must put them "on the beach," as the phrase is, and bring in men from the hiring halls to take their places.

Now, does that plan make for well-selected and efficient personnel! Rear Admiral Wiley. It certainly does not, sir. In carrying out such authority as we have under the Maritime Act of 1936 in regard to the minimum manning and wage scales and working conditions for the subsidized vessels, we still continue to run 38 ships for the account of the Commission, by managing agents. And with those ships and the ships that we subsidized, we have done what we could to offer inducements, or we have offered inducements, for a continuous service. But I do not know whether or not it will be effective. Of course, it could not be effective if this thing goes on. I would not like to have myself placed, as Commissioner, in the position of being an antiunionist. I have been placed out in front in that position before. But as a matter of fact, I am a pretty good organized-labor man. I am a good friend of the workingman-probably one of the best friends the sailor had, during my service in the Navy. I am still a friend of the sailor. The sailor will never come into his own unless these private hiring halls are done away with. He does not get fair treatment. He would not get fair treatment under any system such as is working today, regardless of who are the leaders or the so-called leaders. After all, it seems to me that this is a Federal function, and consequently the Government should look out for the sailorman and build up his morale. What I suggest does not in any way interfere with any legal right of any labor organization. And I feel that they can ask for no more.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. Admiral, would you mind taking a minute to tell us how the hiring hall worked when the owners administered it?

Rear Admiral WILEY. They used a book. As I understand, it was called the bluebook. You understand that what I say is only what I have been told; I am not an authority on this matter.

And, under those conditions, the sailor was not allowed on board any ship belonging to the Ship Owners' Association unless he possessed one of those books. In other words, it was a closed shop, on either side.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. I see.

Rear Admiral WILEY. Then along came this general strike on the Pacific in 1934; and that strike was settled by a board. The board provided in its settlement that in the future the hiring hall for the seamen should be under joint control. Incidentally, this was the situation on the west coast, you understand. I am speaking of the settlement that was made out there.

And in connection with the joint control that I just spoke of, it was provided, as I recall, that there should be three members representative of the unions and three representative of the shipowners. That is my recollection; I may be mistaken regarding the number. But the dispatcher was to be a representative of the unions. Well, through this joint-control device, the unions wrested control of the hiring halls; because the dispatcher is the man who sends the men down to fill vacancies or to be taken aboard ship. If the master should send back one of those men and say, "We prefer somebody else; we know this man and know that he is not efficient for this job," then the reply would be, "There is nobody else to send."

You can understand that situation; that is an easy way of avoiding it.

But it appears to me that there is no justification for violation of the Federal law, whether the unions want it or whether the shipowners want it.

All of the suggestions that I make are suggestions that, in different language, have already been made before your committee, sir, by old Andrew Furuseth. And you gentlemen who knew Andrew Furuseth know that he was a very fine, honorable gentleman.

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes; a wonderful man.

Rear Admiral Wiley. He was always working for the uplift of the sailor.

He is the man who deserves, and receives, I suppose, except from these modern leaders, the credit for having taken the sailor out of chains, as the saying is.

The CHAIRMAN. He was responsible for the La Follette Act.

Rear Admiral Wiley. I should just like to read to you here, in that connection, one of the recommendations I am making as to the amending of section 4508 of the Revised Statutes, which deals with the general duties of a shipping commissioner. There is only one change from what it is at present. [Reading :)

SEC. 4508. The general duties of a shipping commission shall be:
First. To keep a register of available seamen.

Second. To afford facilities for engaging seamen by providing a shipping office exclusively under his control, where masters of vessels may choose their crews and where seamen may choose such engagements as are available to them.. Engagements for sea service shall be made in no other way except in such cases as are authorized by existing law or as amended by this Act.

Third. To superintend the selection and the shipment and discharge of seamen on domestic v'esseis in ports of the United States and in the mauner prescribed by law.

Fourth. To facilitate the making of apprenticeships to the sea service.

Fifth. To perform such other duties relating to merchant seamen or merchant ships as are now or may hereafter be required by law.

We would propose to make his duties more embracing. One reason, among others, why they never carried out their duties as laid down by the law is that they never had any facilities, and this is to atford facilities for providing seamen by providing a shipping office excusively under his control, where masters of vessels may choose their crews and where seamen may choose such engagements are available to them. [Reading:]

. Engagements for sea service shall be made in no other way except in such cases as are authorized by existing law or as amended by this Act.

This is the second one of the duties laid down for shipping commissioners. The first one is the same as provided for by statute now.

Senator Thomas of Utah. The shipping commissioner would be in charge of the hiring hall?

The C'HAIRMAN. That is the law now.

Rear Admiral Wiley. It is not so interpreted now, and it has not been carried out. I am only asking that this be made more specific, to make it mandatory that he shall have proper facilities, just the same as a large employment agency, where anyone who is seeking employment can go up and be decently comfortable while waiting for engagements. The law does not say that at the present time. I think it is on page 18, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Admiral, did we not have that sort of arrangement at the time when former Mayor Kline, of New York, was in charge of hiring in New York for the Shipping Board ?

Rear Admiral Wiley. Well, I am not informed on that subject.
Is not that law on page 48?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes. It reads:
Shipping officers: The general duties of a shipping commissioner shell be:

First. To afford facilities for engaging seamen by keeping a register of their names and characters.

Second. To superintend their engagement and discharge in manner prescribed by law.

Third. To provide means for securing the presence on board at the proper times of men who are so engaged.

Fourth. To facilitate the making of apprenticeships to the sea service.

Fifth. To perform such other duties relating to merchant seamen or merchant ships as are now or may hereafter be required by law.

Do you mean before 1934, Senator?

Senator THOMAS of Utah. Originally; yes. Then the practice which was started by the owners was taken over by the labor unions and was perpetuated.

Rear Admiral WILEY. That is what it amounts to; yes.
Senator Thomas of Utah. Neither practice is within the law?
Rear Admiral Wiley: Neither one is within the law; no.

Senator THOMAS of Utah. Are both practices antagonistic to the law?

« ÎnapoiContinuați »