« ÎnapoiContinuați »
The thing which makes us most ins: Se cet, which in se dars o' nsing prices and more which should be going in:o the workers para Ini the week. Ses instead to the well-ained pockers Ser criminal private detective agener, in onier isi ime IS 3. organized marke kept in subrzation and sitert. D:Xized may be demorazzed and defeated in the Sims to join a trade union.
I would s 23:20 voir einmite: 3 Stereo exhaustire, of to Liminating documents rei the famous, or infamoss, I Break Sines, water. Term ace strikebreaker and pizz-zv. sameier SA The second is a revisei
miss abstie listinni the United Siaips, as the basic fessus. entitled "Donetic Disturbanc." It is a restari i Douglas MacArthur's latest (
orial pamplet n bera Geismai military vir skaid act when in ti.e capacity of a sink that was issued Aczest 1, 1:35. snd is signed br the Crec and bears the imprinture of Brig. Gen. E.T. Conier, lang T: Adjutant General: at this docum.. stoltires in ghiasts a show National Guardstuen mas pritlaghter workers, without fear of court action.
With special attention to strikes, this manual at page 63, quotes from a report made by General MacArthur covering the use of chemical agents during a 1933 domestic disturbance." It says:
In cosciisti. I wish to state that a sorts stou'd be made, when the use of gas is coatempsted, to spp.5 p.sty of it. It certainly tas a far greater effect on civil distur asce m stra: pissicai fcrce, display of weapocs, or show of force.
Howerer, lest you think that General MacArthur really contemplated letting us oti so easy, that is, with nothing but gas as a weapon, I would like to turn to the shoot to kill" order, given on page 1. of the manual. It says:
Blank cartridges stod dever be used against the meb, nor sheuld s voller be fired over tte Lesnis of tre mob, even if there is little danger of burting persons in the rear. Sucr. t. 1.25 are as a irissica of weakress or as attempt to bluti, and they do more barn that good.
Mr. MARCANTONIO. Were those orders issued by a general of the United States Arms?
Mr. GORMAN, Yes; by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, l'nited States Army, Chief of Staff.
Mr. MAECANTONIO. Any officer who would issue such a contemptible order should be courtmartialed.
Mr. GORMAN. Those are to be found in a revised manual which can be secured froin the Government Printing Office for 10 cents.
Mr. MARCANTONIO. This is the same Gen. Douglas Mac Arthur who, as Chief of Staff of our Army, had immediate charge of the soldiers who so disgracefully drove the bonus marchers out of Washington about 2 years ago, I take it? Mr. GORMAN: Yes; he is the same man.
Later the general of the United States peoples Army says that militiamen may shoot to kill without fear of being hauled up on a murder charge. We certainly have many evidences of the truth of this instruction, as, for instance, the Pelzer, S. C., inciderin which we cannot go today. General MacArthur further states that in case of bloodshed, in most instances murder may be considered "legal” from the War Department's standpoint. He is, however, careful to cover the civil angle as well, and he assures the unwitting, would-be murderer that, providing they act under orders from a superior, such killings can generally be regarded as "accidental.” That may be found at page 11 in the manual.
I am now about to bring out about the National Guard in time of strikes, because we had an unfortunate experience in our national strike of 1934. Without attempting to in anyway frighten or intimidate gentlemen of the committee, I want to make this statement: If this legislation is not passed the strike of 1934 will fade into insignificance compared to the strike that will happen. The people in this industry are desperate; the longer we wait, the longer they are persecuted and they are not in a playful mood.
We can see what is happening in Pekin, Ill. We can see the strike threats all over the United States. The employers in the textile industry have not been known to protect the workers, regardless of the wealth of statistical evidence presented here. Plainly, they are going rapidly back to pre-code conditions. Once the people are thoroughly aroused, they will strike. They will not go back so easily. They went back the last time at the earnest request of the President of the United States. The next time I believe the country will see something we never have seen before, much as I regret it.
Mr. Wood. What has caused the strikes following the voiding of the National Recovery Act?
Mr. GORMAN. Violation of codes, lowering of wages, lowering of standards, and chiseling.
Mr. Wood. And speeding up?
Mr. Wood. And then there is the general movement by employers and manufacturers to disregard and to combat the idea of collective bargaining.
Mr. GORMAN. That is right.
Mr. Wood. The employer wants to deny to the employees the right to organize.
Mr. GORMAN. Yes; and there are no greater offenders than the gentlemen who produced the pantomime we saw here only last night. Hundreds of workers in that man's plant have been victimized for joining the union.
Mr. Wood. Some of these manufacturers went along and recognized the right of collective bargaining during the life of the code, but since the voiding of the National Recovery Act they have changed their attitude?
Mr. GORMAN. A few of them recognize that in the southern part of the country. There was some compliance in the North on account of organization; but there was a fight in pursuance of that traditional hatred against unionism in the South.
I am bringing out about the National Guard and the United States Army because if we must go into another fight-if the Congress believes it cannot pass this legislation, I know we are going to have a fight. If we must go into it, we believe that somebody, the representatives of the people in Washington, will see to it that our civil and constitutional rights are preserved. It is going to be a real fight,
and it will be between industry and labor. We do not want the State or the Federal Government to enter into the controversy. We are pointing this out to show what they are building up against organized labor, the organized labor movement, in this country.
I have more material on the National Guard and the basis manual to which I have referred. I will ask that it be placed in the record.
Not content with its many pink-faced, uninformed boys who serve in a purely strikebreaking capacity in the National Guard, the War Department seeks also to foment a pseudo class war by enlisting the sympathies and services of the American Legion against pickets and strikers, during periods of so-called "domestic disturbances." We had a bill before the last Congress declaring that the National Guard should be deprived of Federal equipment, based on the principle that the Federal Government has no earthly business serving as a strikebreaking agency, and thus as such a bald ally of one class of our people against another.
We, the tetxile workers, realize the seriousness of this curious Government position, when we recall to mind that National Guard, or State militia, were used at will by such stupid, cruel tyrants as Governor Eugene Talmadge, of Georgia, who is now engaged in an active campaign against the very administration which furnished him with the artillery with which to kill our workers.
It is well known to the workers that State and municipal governments are not agents of the people themselves. Our only recourse, then, is the Federal Government, and while we are debating the constitutionality of acts affecting "interstate” or “intrastate" commerce-right under the shadow of the Supreme Court ax-we should take stock of the sins committed in the name of the Constitution.
Cries have been made about the United States Congress delegating undue power to the Executive. This was the basis of the ponderous Supreme Court decision with respect to the National Recovery Act and the Agricultural Adjustment Act. While that argument is advanced, however, and while we quake in our boots in fear of a Fascist coup, we should bear in mind the untrammeled activities of the Eugene Talmadges, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the American Liberty League. Here are the real Fascists' organizations and here the germ is breeding.
This bill is an attempt to equalize conditions in the textile industry and to bring peace and contentment and real happiness for the workers in the textile industry. By no stretch of the imagination could it be said to be an attempt to dictate, but our opponents are part of the conspiracy that would impose upon this country a dictatorship by fascism in some form or other.
Money, power, and influence synonymous these days can make a national hero out of as dismal and uncomely a person as Adolf Hitler was in the beer-ball putsch days.
Workers are now more political conscious. They are fired with a determination to redress the wrongs done them over a long, long period of time, and the textile workers are leaders within the everexpanding group. Long suffering, ill-nourished, and persecuted, these men and these women have more than once demonstrated their ability to rise in protest against the shackles of chattle slavery.
We come to you, therefore, in sincerity and in desperation, asking the representatives of the people to act in behalf of a large section of our wage-earning population.
You have listened to witnesses from mills, most of them ar without a cent in their pockets and came for the first time w the walls of the Congress of their United States. They came all industrial and geographical divisions of the industry, but one motive, namely, to tell you of their misery and their degrad The tide of indignation, swept by the pure force of economic sity, is arising slowly but surely. The reactionry, Fascist for the United States are against the people. The Congress United States must be for them.
The "vested interests” said that our 1934 strike was re against the Government and an attempt to set up an "ii empire.” It was no such thing. It was a rebellion again vation, against humiliation, against slow and certain death un rigors of our modern industrial order, and therefore it was a i against all and any who took part in perpetuating these coi. We did not think it was the Government then. We do not now. And we present to you H. R. 9072, the National Tex. hoping that you will prove we are right.
İf, however, Congress does not prove we are right, we reaction a change to say the same thing again. We are gesting a this time that Congress do away with the "profi as was intimated in the report of one industry witness. simply suggesting that the Congress protect the people to is responsible.
We leave our case with you, and I should like to say witnesses and the United Textile Workers of America, that ciate the attentiveness with which you have listened to ou
Those who appeared before you came with heavy hearts stomachs. They left with hope in their hearts, thoug enough in their stomachs. They trust in you; they belie honeyed words of the professional patriot and the Libe bell ringers will go unheeded. Though not the final ar feel, and we feel, that the National Textile Act will serve ing wedge for the emancipation of a vast body of pove and oppressed people.
In conclusion I want to offer for inclusion in the rer communications and documents. First is an illuminatin by William D. Anderson, president of the Bibb Manufa Columbua, Ga. In this document he shows that the have turned dietitians.
Next is a letter by Attorney J. L. Hamme, Gast addressed to Mr. Tom Lay.
Next is a statement of loans made to those in the ti by the Reconstruction Finance Corporation.
Next is a price history of two staple cotton fabri received from Scheuer & Co., textile brokers and Leonard Street, New York City.
Next is a letter from the local secretary of the Workers of America, Tom L. Lay, Lincolnton, N. eviction against textile workers.
Then we have a letter from one employed by the Mills, Lancaster, S. C., but the writer does not sign l.
Next we have a letter from Mr. Herman Stein, a ro the United Textile Workers of America, York, Pa.
Then there is a letter from C. A. McAbee, international executive member, Inman, S. C.
Next is a telegram from J. W. Harrison, secretary of Spartanburg, S. C., Central Labor Union.
Lastly, I want to give you a description of the chart that we have submitted.
This indicating) chart shows how textile employers have solved their problem at the expense of textile workers during the past 10 years. The upper, rising line represents the number of active spindlehours per man-hour of employment in the cotton-textile industry. The lower, declining line shows average weekly wages in the same industry.
The upper line shows how manufacturers have steadily increased the amount of work taken out of the hides of textile labor. It is a crude measure of the increased amount or machinery handled by each productive worker; in other words, it measures the stretch-out.
This [indicatings stretch-out line increased from a base of 100 in 1926 in every year but one to a figure of 128.7 in 1934, a toial increase of 28.7 percent, and an average annual increase of about 3 percent.
It should be borne in mind that this sindicating) line is constructed from data lumping together the man-hours of all textile workers, including those whose jobs are such that little stretch-out or speed-up is possible, such as cleaners, fixers, and outside workers.
As a result, it underestinates the rate of stretch-out to which machine operators are subjected. This factor accounts for the temporary decline in the stretch-out line in 1930, when machine or productive employees were laid off or put on part time, while “nonproductive” employees were kept on for a while in hopes of returning prosperity.
The lower line shows what textile workers received for the work they did. Even before the depression this wages line was declining, and in 1929 it was lower than in the base year of 1926. By 1932 weekly wages declined to 68.6 percent of the 1926 level.. Some increase during the National Recovery Act- but nothing like the 70 percent which the employers talked of- brought the weekly wage index to 79.1 in 1934. As was brought out earlier in the hearings, wage rates are again being cut, and weekly wages will decline sharply as soon as the current spell of heavy production activity weakens.
What is most significant is the constantly growing spread between the two lines, the growing spread between what the employers get out of the workers, and what the workers get in return. Even when we received slightly higher weekly wages in 1933 and 1934, most of the increase was taken by the employers through the stretch-out. fact, the increasing stretch-out and declining wages were closely related. Stretch-out increases unemployment and part-time work; therefore it directly decreases labor's income. Through creating ununemployment, it weakens labor's bargaining power and makes it easier for the employers to reduce wage rates.
Complete figures for 1935 are not yet available, but it appears from data for the first 10 months that, in spite of improved business in the cotton textile industry, employment has averaged 15,000 men less than in 1934 and pay rolls just about the same. This means that, due to rising living costs, the real income of cotton textile workers declined further last year.