It is the view of our members that the personal freedom of the individual worker to join or not to join a union is the central issue in this matter. For instance: In one section of our current, year-long, factfinding survey, "Small Business— The Nation's Largest Employer," we ask our members if they expanded during the past 12 months, whether they have found capital readily available, how much (if anything) they have spent on expansion, and how many (if any) new job openings have resulted. We received 17,009 signed responses during the first quarter, out of an expected 80,000 during the year. Comparing responses from the 19 "right-to-work" States with those from the 41 "non-right-to-work" States we find the following: A slightly higher rate of expansion, accompanied by a slightly higher capital availability, in the "non-right-to-work" States, but * * * A slightly higher rate of new job formation per expansion, at a markedly lower cost per new job opening, in the "right-to-work" States. The foregoing is, of course, on a general basis. A State-by-State comparison would show even more significant findings. For instance, two of the four States with the highest expansion rates are Iowa and Alabama-both "right-to-work" States. Further, the rate of expansion in the South Atlantic area, the stronghold of "right-to-work" laws, is second only to that reported in the three Middle Atlantic States. The foregoing should demonstrate conclusively that right-to-work" laws, while securing the freedom of the individual to join or not join unions, and assuring the businessman of the right to offer employment freely, do not all at create or encourage a climate that is unfavorable to job-creating will and potential of small business which, after all, are the main interest of all working people. We urge that you reject all proposals to repeal, in effect, the "right-to-work" laws, and that you maintain in full force section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act. Senator PELL. This adjourns the morning session until tomorrow when we come back into session at 10 o'clock in the morning. (Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m. on Thursday, June 24.) TO REPEAL SECTION 14(b) OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1965 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON LABOR OF THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 4232, New Senate Office Building, Senator Pat McNamara (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators McNamara (presiding), Morse, Javits, Prouty, and Fannin. Committee staff members present: Stewart S. McClure, chief clerk; John Bruff, counsel of the Subcommittee on Labor; Stephen Kurzman, minority counsel; Frank Cummings, minority labor counsel; and Peter Benedict, minority professional staff member. Senator MCNAMARA. The subcommittee will be in session. Senator Fannin, I understand that you have a correction for the record. Senator FANNIN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Senator MCNAMARA. Go right ahead. Senator FANNIN. I would like to make a correction. In the interest of obtaining an accurate record of these proceedings I want to submit a correction and supporting explanation of a brief portion of my testimony yesterday. Statewide votes on the "right-to-work" question in Arizona, first in 1946 and again in 1948, resulted from measures sponsored by citizens committees. Although labor organizations did not initiate an attempted repeal of the amendment, their arguments against "right-to-work" were printed in the official publicity booklets distributed by the secretary of state's office for public information and explanation of the amendment that appeared on the ballot in 1946. To clarify any misunderstanding that may have resulted from my remarks on this one point, I submit for the record a brief legislative history of Arizona's "right-to-work" amendment and related statutes, as compiled and issued by the Secretary of State of Arizona. Senator MCNAMARA. It will be included at this point. (The information requested follows:) RIGHT TO WORK BI from 1946 AND 1948 REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION PUBLICITY PAMPHLETS PICKETING AND SECONDARY BOYCOTT from 1952 REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION PUBLICITY PAMPHLET Compiled and Issued WESLEY BOLIN 129 RIGHT TO WORK BILL 1946 To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona for their approval or rejection at the REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION to be held ON NOVEMBER 5, 1946 Proposed by Initiative Petition of the People and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, July 2, 1946, and printed in pursuance of Paragraph 60-107, Chapter 60, Article 1, Arizona Code Annotated, 1939. DAN E. GARVEY, Sec. of State (On Official Ballot Nos. 106-107) INITIATIVE PETITION AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION BY INITIATIVE PETITION PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE AN ACT PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF A NEW ARTICLE PROVIDING FOR AND PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF NON-MEMBERS OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS TO THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK. BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA: That the Constitution of the State of Arizona be amended by adding thereto another Article to read as follows: No person shall be denied the opportunity to obtain or retain employment because of non-membership in a labor organization, nor shall the state or any subdivision thereof, or any corporation, individual or association of any kind enter into any agreement, written or oral, which excludes any person from employment or continuation of employment because of non-membership in a labor organization. The following is the form and number in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION RELATING TO "PROVIDING FOR AND PROTECTING THE RIGHT TO THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK" PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF A NEW ARTICLE PROVIDING FOR AND PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF NON-MEMBERS OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS TO THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK. If you favor the above law, vote YES if opposed, vote NO. |