Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

TO REHABILITATE AND STABILIZE LABOR CONDITIONS IN THE TEXTILE INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES

TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1936

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met at 10 a. m., in the caucus room, Old House Office Building, Hon. Kent E. Keller (chairman) presiding.

Mr. KELLER. The committee will be in order. Gentlemen, two of our members will not be able to be present this morning, but the others will be here in a few minutes. I am going to give Senator Fitzgerald the opportunity of speaking to just two of the members of the committee at this moment, unless he prefers to wait until the others come in. I extend that opportunity also to Lieutenant Governor Hurley. If the gentleman would rather wait until the other members come in, we are glad to wait, but if not, we should be glad to start at this time.

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have more members of the committee present, of course, but if they are detained at other committee meetings, I would as soon go on at this time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Marcantonio is presiding over another hearing having to do with silicosis, in the committee room of the Labor Committee this morning, and he will be busy at least until noon.

Mr. Welch and Mr. Schneider will be here very soon, I am sure, and so will Mr. Hartley and the others.

Mr. WOOD. These remarks will be in the record and the committee members will be able to read them.

Mr. KELLER. Very well, we shall be glad to hear Senator Fitzgerald.

STATEMENT of Hon. WILLIAM J. FITZGERALD, DEPUTY LABOR COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: I am here as a representative of Governor Cross, of the State of Connecticut, representing labor.

Mr. KELLER. If you hold any political office, will you state what it is?

Mr. FITZGERALD. I am deputy labor commissioner of the State of Connecticut. I want to take this opportunity of thanking the chairman of the meeting and the members of the committee for the courtesy that they have extended to the Governor, through me, in giving me the opportunity of speaking first this morning.

There are a great many features of this bill that I believe are good and would be good legislation. There are a great many features of this

bill that Connecticut today can boast of, that we have enacted into law, under the leadership of Governor Cross, during the last 6 years.

We know that we have raised our standards in the State of Connecticut, but, like other States which have raised standards, we are finding out that possibly it might work a hardship upon some of the industries in the State.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, there is no doubt in my mind that with the invention of modern machinery today, production has increased by the hundred-fold and if we are every going to take up the slack in this country, we have got to have a regulation of hours.

There is no question in my mind on that issue. I believe that the experience of the N. R. A., when the hours of this Nation were reduced to 40, proved without a doubt that that was one of the ways out.

Connecticut has enacted a child-labor law. It enacted that law at the last session of the general assembly. No child in Connecticut under 16 years of age can be employed, or under 18 on hazardous or injurious occupations.

It is true that we have a minimum wage for women in Connecticut also. But we know it would be suicide, in a great many respects, if we put this machinery into motion. A law providing for 48 hours for women and minors was passed at the last session of the general assembly of the State of Connecticut, with a string on it, that in peak periods or in cases of emergency, they can go back to 55 hours.

A weekly wage law has been on the statute books of Connecticut for a great many years.

Reading over this bill, it came as a revelation to me the necessity for legislation of this kind today in America, so that people shall not be compelled to live in company houses and to trade in company stores. If that kind of legislation is necessary in some portions of the country, then I say it is good legislation because, perhaps in the future, they will tell some of the employees of industry what church they will have to go to.

I believe the textile industry in the State of Connecticut has religiously adhered to the 40-hour week. As deputy commissioner of labor, I know of no violations of those provisions. But I have seen a break-down of wage conditions in the State of Connecticut that was made necessary by other States that had increased their hours of labor and had broken down their minimum standards.

I know that in the State of Connecticut, during the last 6 weeks, four strikes have taken place in order to resist wage reductions. It is true that the minimum has been held, or lived up to, but the higher brackets are where the cuts have been coming.

They have been bringing down the skilled employees to the level of nearly $13 a week. I feel possibly that they are justified because I have employers in mind who have told me that in order to run they must keep abreast of the States that have gone back to 50 and 60 hours of work per week, and the employment of child labor in this industry.

Members of the committee, I am myself a victim of an industry being taken away from the North and being moved to other portions of the country. I worked for 30 years in a foundry. I sweated for 30 years, all my life, for one firm. We had good conditions and good hours in that industry, and for 30 years, men, we had an agreement

with our manufacturers whereby we never lost 5 minutes on account of any kind of labor trouble. And we went through the whole period of the war.

But then ambitious chambers of commerce came along and they pictured to this industry how they could go into other portions of the country and get labor for nothing; that hours could be increased; that men of my type, who only had an opportunity to work for a living, to bring up a family and educate them-because I resisted reductions and because the standards of other States were lowered, that plant was moved from Connecticut to Pennsylvania, and they got their cheap labor; and 300 men-some of them after 40 and 50 years of service were thrown out onto the streets.

In this textile industry I know of a plant in the eastern part of the State where conditions were fine, where the weavers were receiving $1.90 for 100,000 picks weaving, and then I saw southern competition come in, with free buildings, free power, $35,000 appropriated to move them, and the board of education to put the machinery into the schools to break in the operatives-and what happened? In order to save that plant in the east they took a reduction from $1.90 to $1.50, and the price, today, is down to $1.20 and two more looms have been added.

That is the reason; other States have got lower standards; and in order to keep those plants that have better standards in operation they are forced to meet the competition.

After that reduction was made-and that whole reduction went throughout the silk industry in the State of Connecticut-each plant, or a majority of them, came in seeking a reduction in wages and their whole claim was that they could not meet competition in other sections of the country.

I believe that textile manufacturers of Connecticut are willing to keep these standards high, but the competition that has set in, has made it impossible for them to maintain those high standards.

I believe, members of the committee, that the only way out is a regulation of hours. Whether this bill is the proper bill or not, I am not in a position to say and I am not going to argue the constitutionality of it. I am going to leave that to you men. But I do say to you, members of the committee, that there were some good features in the N. R. A. and we should benefit by our experience with the N. R. A.

We should benefit by the 2 years of experience that we had with the N. R. A. and try to bring out a bill that will wipe out unfair standards and will bring the States with low standards up to the States that have a standard that an American should have the right to work under.

Mr. WOOD. Mr. Fitzgerald, according to your statement, you would approve the general principles of this bill?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. WOOD. There was a gentleman here yesterday who purported to be representing the Governor of the State of Connecticut. That is to say, he advised the committee that the Governor sent him down here, or that he came at the suggestion of the Governor, representing the textile manufacturers, or a group of them, in Connecticut. Now, you are representing the Governor, are you not?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Yes, sir; I am the representative of the Governor also.

Mr. WOOD. I believe you are the one who is properly representing the Governor, as you are the deputy labor commissioner and do not represent any particular group. I just wonder how it is that the Governor would send one man down here to represent him, in opposition to the bill, and another man down here who is in favor of the bill, also representing him.

Mr. FITZGERALD. I got no instructions at all from the Governor. When the Governor called me to his office and sent me down here to represent him, I said to the Governor that I wanted his views on the question and he told me to go down and use my own judgment. Mr. Wood. You did not go to the Governor, he called you? Mr. FITZGERALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. WOOD. He called you in?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. WOOD. I believe the gentleman who testified yesterday said that he went to the Governor.

Mr. FITZGERALD. I believe that the Governor sent him, Congress

man.

Mr. WOOD. I would like to recall him and ask him.

Mr. RAMSPECK. I think he said that the Governor asked him to represent the viewpoint of the manufacturers, Mr. Wood. In other words, the Governor is providing for representation here both of the employer and the employee. Is that right, Mr. Fitzgerald? Mr. FITZGERALD. I believe so, yes.

Mr. RAMSPECK. The Governor is not taking any position himself. Mr. Wood. The point is that the gentleman who testified yesterday represented himself as representing the Governor. Naturally, any one representing a Governor would be presumed in some way to represent the Governor's views.

Mr. KELLER. No; I did not get that idea, Mr. Wood. I got the idea that the Governor asked him to represent the views of the operators and he sent Mr. Fitzgerald here to represent the views of labor.

Mr. WOOD. No; as Mr. Fitzgerald just said, the Governor called him in. Of course, that is true, or Mr. Fitzgerald, as the deputy labor commissioner, would not say so, because he is part of the Governor's cabinet. The Governor called him in and told him to come to Washington and represent him before this committee on this bill.

Now, I would like to get this clear for the record. I do not want any misconception here on any one's part. I just want to make the matter very clear that the gentleman who testified yesterday was representing the manufacturers and was not testifying in behalf of the Governor. He told this committee that he went to the Governor and of course the Governor very graciously told him that he could come down here.

Mr. KELLER. We can save time and ask him. He is here. Mr. Nickerson, will you tell us how you happened to come to the committee; and do not tell us any more than that, because we want Senator Fitzgerald to complete his testimony.

Mr. NICKERSON. The Governor called me on the telephone and asked me to represent him by presenting the point of view of the textile manufacturers of Connecticut.

Mr. KELLER. Thank you.

Mr. WOOD. I thought, Mr. Nickerson, you said you went to the Governor?

Mr. NICKERSON. Is that a question?

Mr. WOOD. Yes. I thought you said yesterday that you went to the Governor and suggested that you come down here and testify. I think that is in your testimony of yesterday, is it not?

Mr. KELLER. No.

Mr. WOOD. Now, Mr. Chairman, you might be mistaken, just as I might be.

Mr. KELLER. I asked Mr. Nickerson and he just said what the fact is. Do you want him to repeat it?

Mr. Wood. I asked him what he testified to yesterday. That is not what he said yesterday.

Mr. KELLER. We can put him on the stand again, at the proper time, but we want to get along and finish with Mr. Fitzgerald's testimony.

Mr. WOOD. I would like to ask Mr. Nickerson that question now. Mr. KELLER. Very well, ask him, Mr. Wood.

Mr. WOOD. What did you tell us yesterday, Mr. Nickerson? Mr. NICKERSON. I told you yesterday exactly the same thing I just told you.

Mr. Wood. Of course, the record will speak for itself.

Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. WOOD. Now, Mr. Fitzgerald, you said that there were four strikes in the past 6 weeks that had been occasioned by an attempt to reduce wages, on the part of the manufacturers, or the employers, and that these strikes were occasioned or caused by neighboring States raising the number of hours of labor and reducing wages; that the manufacturers of Connecticut had to come around to meet that competition.

Mr. FITZGERALD. That is right.

Mr. Wood. And to meet it by a similar stretching of the hours and a reduction of wages?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Yes.

Mr. WOOD. Do you not think that is a very sound reason why legislation of this type should be enacted?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Absolutely. The only way is by regulation of hours and wages.

Mr. WOOD. Uniform regulation?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Absolutely. I know it. I went through the N. R. A. I saw the benefits of it. I now see a group of boys in the C. C. C. camps and I see thousands of kids on the way to Washington, coasting on the streets, and I wonder where the slack is going to be taken up, if we are going to give John Smith 70 hours a week and Bill Jones charity. There is only so much. Modern machinery has increased production so many hundred percent that the only way out, in my opinion--and I have lived a whole life of it-is by a regulation of hours, and some intelligent regulation.

Mr. WOOD. That is all.

Mr. RAMSPECK. You say you went through the N. R. A.; were you deputy labor commissioner then?

Mr. FITZGERALD. Yes, sir. I was on the State Advisory Board.

56725-36- -10

« ÎnapoiContinuă »