TO REGULATE THE TEXTILE INDUSTRY TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1937 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The subcommittee met in the caucus room, Old House Office Building, at 10:30 a. m., Hon. Kent E. Keller (chairman) presiding. Present: Representatives Keller (chairman), Ramspeck, Gildea, Schneider, Welch, and Smith. Mr. KELLER. The subcommittee will please be in order. I want Mr. Hankin to talk to you a minute or two about what we did last night. Mr. HANKIN. Mr. Chairman, upon consideration of the discussion that took place here yesterday and further consideration of the bill, I suggest the following changes: On page 10, line 17, relating to the set-up of the Federal Trade Commission, strike out the word "actively." Then the language would read that "No Commissioner shall engage in any other business, vocation, or employment." Again, on page 15, we found that the first sentence in subsection (c), lines 12 and 13, should be stricken. The reason for striking that is because it does not add to or subtract from the powers of the Federal Government to investigate associations. On page 22, line 4, there is a misprint. The first number should be 5 instead of 6. On page 24, line 23, the word "collector" should be "collective." That refers to collective agreements. On page 25, line 9, we have inserted an important suggestion, namely, to add the following at end of the sentence: Provided, That in determining the minimum wages, the hours from midnight to 6 a. m. shall be computed at the rate of time and one-half. Therefore this subsection would read as follows: (d) The basis of determining minimum wages shall be a 40-hour week of 8 hours per day; for all work done in excess of 8 hours per day or in excess of 40 hours per week, employees shall be paid at the rate of time and one-half, and for all work done on Sundays and legal holidays, they shall be paid at the rate of double time, except as hereinafter provided. Then, continuing Provided, That in determining the minimum wages, the hours from midnight to 6 a. m. shall be computed at the rate of time and one-half. Mr. ELLENBOGEN. That would be a reduction in the minimum wages instead of an increase. Mr. HANKIN. No; it means that if $15 is the minimum wage for 40 hours, if an employee works between the hours of midnight and 6 a. m., those 6 hours shall be counted as 9 hours. On page 26, line 2, after the words "$15 per week", insert the phrase, "as computed in subsection (d) hereof." In other words, there should be the same computation of time for the week that is included in subsection (d). The same computation of time for the week, which is included in subsection (d) will be applicable to subsection (g). The next change refers to section 25, appearing at page 53 of the bill. That refers to Government purchases and loans. I recommend that you strike out the word "instrumentality" so that it will read, "by any department, bureau, or agency.' Are there any questions concerning these proposed changes? (After a pause.) If not, I am through. Mr. KELLER. We thank you. In discussing these matters, if other members of the subcommittee have the time to come to my office every afternoon and go into these matters with me and Mr. Hankin, I shall be only too delighted to have them do so. We will have our reports available every morning. We are trying to bring back to you a bill that has been improved a little each day. That is what we are doing, namely, taking advantage of the work we are doing here each day. We will now hear Mr. Ellenbogen. STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY ELLENBOGEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. ELLENBOGEN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I would like to have the permission of the committee to appear as the last witness before the committee, after labor and industry have presented their cases and also after the Government departments have presented their case. At that time I hope to have the opportunity to go over the bill section by section and to make such suggestions as may appear to be advisable in view of the facts presented at the hearing. Of course, the responsibility for determining the final terms of the bill rests solely with the committee and anything I may present is merely in the nature of a suggestion, and for consideration of the committee. Whatever final determination regarding any and all provisions of the bill may be made by the committee will, of course, be acceptable to me as sponsor of the bill. At this time I would like to present tentatively and only tentatively for consideration of the committee the suggestion that the committee consider the advisability of postponing for future consideration all fair-trade practices, except that paragraph which gives to the National Textile Commission power to eliminate the night shift. I am submitting this for the consideration of the committee in view of the fact that these fair-trade practices have been inserted in the bill for the purpose of improving conditions in the textile industry and helping the employers in the industry. However, it appears that a part of the industry is lukewarm toward the fair-trade practices. It may be questioned whether it is advisable to enact into law the fair-trade practices unless they are desired by the overwhelming majority in the industry. It would expedite consideration and passage of the bill and may also be wise in view of the attitude of certain portions of the industry toward fair-trade practices if the committee will postpone consideration of these fair-trade practices for the future, until the opinion of the industry regarding these trade practices becomes more crystallized or until the committee deems it opportune to proceed regarding the trade practices. If that is done there will be no need for the consumers' counsel, and in that case the sections of the bill relating to the consumers' counsel should also be eliminated. If the committee should desire to follow this course the bill would be limited to the following provisions: First, a provision for maximum hours; secondly, a provision for minimum wages for unskilled workers; thirdly, a provision for minimum wages for various classifications of skill; fourthly, provision regarding learners; fifthly, elimination of child labor; sixthly, granting of power to National Textile Commission to eliminate the night shifts, if it is necessary for the purpose of removing adverse effects upon interstate com merce. I am presenting the question of the elimination of fair-trade practices to the committee at this time so that future witnesses may express their attitude concerning the bill with these sections eliminated. I definitely recommend the elimination of those sections of the bill which deal with Government purchases and loans, because in substance the important part of this section is contained in the WalshHealey Act. This is section 24 in H. R. 238 or section 25 of the committee print. These sections were inserted in the bill before the Walsh-Healey Act was passed. This would give a more simplified and short bill-a bill which could be more easily administered and which would be certain to be successful in practical application. I want to repeat that all these suggestions are submitted for the consideration of the committee and that I will accept the bill in such form as the committee may determine. I now renew my request that I be given permission to appear as the last witness so that I may have the opportunity to go over the bill section by section and present whatever may appear to be advisable at that time. Mr. KELLER. We will consider that request. You may be assured that you will be given a chance to say everything you want to say. We may have to recall other witnesses. Mr. RAMSPECK. Do you want to say anything about the hours and the wages fixed in this redraft? Mr. ELLENBOGEN. No; not at this time. I will defer that until you have heard the other witnesses. Mr. RAMSPECK. I understood you to say yesterday that you were opposed to those changes. Mr. ELLENBOGEN. The only thing I said yesterday was that I want to recommend the elimination of that section of the bill that provides for the registration of contracts between labor unions and employers; but I did not make any statement in regard to wages and hours. I should like to postpone a statement in regard to those things. What I have in mind may be affected by what witnesses may say here. Mr. HANKIN. Is it your understanding that a provision concerning_registration or filing of those contracts is mandatory? Mr. ELLENBOGEN. No. It is only permissible, but it raises a dangerous field, and we shall have to tread very cautiously and slowly when we approach it. Labor is opposed to that. Everybody in the labor movement is opposed to it. It is best that the matter be left alone for the present. Mr. HANKIN. I cannot understand the meaning of "they are opposed to it." Are they opposed to being permitted or to being compelled in connection with it? Mr. ELLENBOGEN. They are opposed to being permitted. They are opposed to it in the bill because they feel that labor leaders should not have the power and industry should not have the power. STATEMENT OF FRANCIS J. GORMAN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA Mr. KELLER. Let us hear Mr. Gorman now. Mr. GORMAN. I am president of the United Textile Workers of America and a member of the Textile Workers' Organizing Commit tee. Mr. Chairman, before I present the case of the union I want to State that the attitude of the employers, in my opinion, concerning this legislation is somewhat amazing. It seems to us that they are adopting a sort of dog-in-the-manger attitude. In the first place they do not want any Federal regulation. They want to be permitted to proceed individually in various parts of the industry and to impose upon the workers any conditions that they decide upon; but they are somewhat fearful that there may be some corrective legislation adopted at this session of the Congress. Therefore they go into conference concerning this legislation and at the same time they stand in opposition to anything and everything that is offered. The position taken by Representative Ellenbogen in regard to fairtrade practices meets the thorough agreement of our organization. In order to bring out the point further I desire to read into the record a newspaper statement of this morning. It is contained in the Daily News Record of Tuesday, May 11, 1937. The article appears under the caption "Woolen group not offering Ellenbogen bill substitute." The article is written from the Washington Bureau of the Daily News Record, and it reads as follows: WASHINGTON, May 10.-The National Association of Wool Manufacturers is not proposing any substitute measure for the Ellenbogen bill, nor has the association considered any bill up to the present time, it was pointed out today by Arthur Besse, president. The understanding among proponents of the bill that the association was backing a substitute appears to have risen out of a misinterpretation of a letter written by Mr. Besse on May 7 to Gregory Hankin, local attorney, who revised the new bill. The letter follows: DEAR MR. HANKIN: Agreeable to the suggestion which you made to me on Wednesday, I am enclosing herewith a document in the form of a bill which expresses the three ideas I covered to you and Congressman Keller on Wednesday. These ideas are, first, maximum hours of 40 per week; second, minimum wages, meaning thereby a single minimum wage for the entire industry, and, third, a commission to take original jurisdiction of labor disputes. We have not in any sense considered the legality of these proposals, nor done anything more than express these proposals in terms of your own language, as taken from the original draft of H. R. 238. |