STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, [Copy of power of attorney] County of Laurens: CLINTON FRIENDSHIP ASSOCIATION, Clinton, S. C. I (or we) hereby authorize Clinton Friendship Association as organization for mutual aid and protection of the employees of the Clinton Cotton Mill, to represent me (or us) in dealing with the Clinton Cotton Mill our employer at Clinton, S. C. This is to give said association full power and authority to cast a vote for me (or us) and to represent me (or us) generally in any matters of collective bargaining or other activities arising between the Clinton Cotton Mill and the above labor organization. I (or we) hereby especially give said labor organization power of attorney to represent me (or us) under the National Labor Relations Act. Witness our hands and seal this day of August 1935. STATEMENT On August 23, 1935, Mr. Clarence Oakley, who is a second hand in the spooling department of the Clinton Cotton Mills, and under whom I have been working told me that the mill would open up on Monday morning, and told me that no one would be allowed to work unless they belong to the Good-will Association or sign a paper giving authority to the association to represent them. He then gave me a typewritten form written on Clinton Friendship Association stationery, and a copy of this is attached to this statement. He said that I would have to sign a statement like this or I could not work on Monday. And asked me if I decided not to sign it to return it to him. Mr. Oakley is a second hand and he employs and discharges help. He has been at the Clinton Mill for about (4) four years. INFORMATION (Signed) Mrs. EDNA KING. On September 12, Mr. Jason Davis, outside overseer called at the homes of (58 or 60) families, and stated Mr. Claude Trammell, paymaster for the Clinton Cotton Mills, told him to come around to notify all who wasn't back at work on or before the 1st of October 1935 house rent would start Monday, September 16, 1935, at the rate of $1 a room a week. (Present rent rate a week, 50 cents a room.) If for any reason these parties not back at work by the 1st of October 1935, their furniture would be attached, and sold for rent. CLINTON, S. C., January 14, 1936. Names below, and address of employees ordered reinstated at their former positions in the Clinton Cotton Mills, Clinton, S. C., instead they having been "evicted." The National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., ordered reinstatement. Mr. SISK. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say one word in regard to corporations receiving loans from the R. F. C. In the mill where I work we came out on strike. The Saxon Mill, at Spartanburg, John A. Law, president, received a loan of $275,000, after which he put on a third shift in the Chesnee Mill, of which is he president. The personnel director of the Saxon Mill took money and hired people to leave the picket line and pay their expenses to go to the other mill. Under those conditions I do not think any corporation ought to be able to borrow any money. Mr. Wood. There is a strike on at this mill, is there? Mr. SISK. Yes, sir; since July 30. Mr. Wood. Did he get the loan after the strike was called? Mr. SISK. It was afterwards; yes, sir. I think we should have some legislation to protect the worker in the cotton mill. Mr. WOOD. What was the reason for this strike? Mr. SISK. Cutting wages, stretch-out, and speeding up. Mr. SISK. Yes, sir; a $3.50 reduction in wages in some parts. It was about $3.50 in some parts of the card room. Mr. WOOD. It was $3.50 per what? Mr. SISK. It was $3.50 per week. When the N. R. A. went into effect they had 75 frames in one part of that mill which had been speeded up and headed up until now they have only 39. That has automatically cut about 22 employees out of the card room alone in that one mill. I can say frankly, as representing the workers of that mill, that they asked me to insist upon this committee's making a favorable report, if possible, in connection with the passage of this legislation which is now pending Mr. WOOD. How long have you been on strike down there? Mr. Wood. You have been on strike since July 30 of last year? Mr. WOOD. Did they receive this loan recently? Mr. SISK. I don't know, but I think probably it was about a month after the strike. Mr. WOOD. It helped them to keep the strike going, didn't it? Mr. GORMAN. Mr. Chairman, that is all we have. I would, however, like to ask permission to be heard myself after the other side has submitted their testimony Mr. KELLER. That has been arranged already. Does this end your evidence? Mr. GORMAN. With the request, Mr. Chairman, that we be heard when the other side has finished. Mr. KELLER. I want to say that there is no disposition on the part of this subcommittee, I know, to the presentation of testimony on the part of anybody. We are going to stick as long as necessary. After each side has been heard if somebody wants to answer something that was said, we are going to permit that, because we believe it ought to be done. We are trying to get all of the facts, not one side of the facts, but all of them on both sides or on as many sides as there may be. We will return at 2:30, at which time the other side will begin its presentation. (Whereupon, at 1:15 p. m., the committee recessed until 2:30 p. m. of the same day.) AFTER RECESS The subcommittee convened after recess at 2 p. m., Hon. Kent E. Keller presiding. Mr. KELLER. The committee will come to order, please. Who is the first witness on the other side? STATEMENT OF ARTHUR BESSE, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOOL MANUFACTURERS Mr. KELLER. Will you give your name, please? Mr. BESSE. Arthur Besse, National Association of Wool Manufacturers. Mr. KELLER. Where is your home? Mr. BESSE. Scarsdale, N. Y. I am here representing the wool textile industry. After careful and detailed examination of the bill here under consideration, as applied to our industry, I can only conclude that in its entirety it is unwise and unworkable and, if enacted, would hinder and not help its avowed objective of promoting interstate commerce in textile products and improving labor conditions in the industry. I do not propose to argue the constitutionality of the bill. I am sure the committee will be grateful for that. While it is difficult for members of our industry to understand, in view of recent decisions of the Supreme Court, how it is possible for the Federal Government to exercise the degree of supervision of our industry contemplated by this bill, I do not feel competent to debate the point and prefer to devote myself to the practical aspects of the proposals made in this so-called national textile bill. The basic objections to the bill, on which I shall enlarge by reference to its specific provisions, seem to me to be the following: (1) It is postulated on a legislative finding of facts which, insofar as the wool textile industry is concerned, are flatly erroneous, both in their statement of evils which are alleged to exist, and in the effect on interstate commerce which is alleged to result from those evils. (2) It proposes to correct those assumed evils by regulations, prohibitions, and economic boycotts which, if put into effect, would, beyond doubt, impede interstate commerce in textile products and defeat the end sought to be accomplished. (3) Viewed as a regulation of the detailed operations of the business, it imposes burdens so heavy that they would necessarily result in injury to employers and employees alike, and it places in the hands of a Government body broad powers which are unjustified by conditions in the industry for which I speak and which are capable of ruinous abuse. The first objection is vital since it is the false assumptions contained in the legislative findings of fact which are presumably thought to justify the drastic Government control over private industry imposed by the bill itself. The first false assumption is as to the existence of specific abuses at the present time. Section 2 (a) finds as a fact the existence of― wages below a decent standard excessive hours, child labor, overburdensome work assignments, other unhealthy and demoralizing conditions of work and excess production *. * * * * * * * * Speaking for the wool textile industry, I wish to point out that the facts belie these statements, which I shall refer to briefly in the order stated in section 2 (a). First, wages. I will ask Mr. Humphreys to give you an exhibit to which I shall refer. EXHIBIT A Average hourly earnings of factory employees on pay rolls of wool textile industry Source: January 1929-August 1933 read from chart on p. 42 in Hours, Wages, and Employment Under the Codes, by N. R. A. September 1933 and thereafter association reports. Exhibit A, hereto attached, gives the average hourly wages paid in the wool textile industry by months from the period January 1929 to November 1935, the last month for which we have figures. This tabulation shows that wages have not been decreased since the termination of the industry's code and that the average wage is considerably above the minimum of $14 prescribed by the code. The present average hourly wage of 47.7 cents compares favorably with the peak of 49 cents reached in the so-called boom year of 1929. I think you gentlemen possibly will have some questions on this exhibit a little later. Exhibit B, hereto attached, shows a graph of the employment index of the wool textile industry contrasted with the index for all industries. This graph shows the extent to which employment in the wool textile industry has improved and shows that the index is now 11 percent higher than the average for 1929. The industry during the past year distributed in wages a total 40 percent greater than in 1934. The graph likewise illustrates the unfortunate effect of the unjustified and abortive strike in September 1934. That is the very substantial dip you will notice for that year. EXHIBIT B STATISTICS OF WOOL MANUFACTURE DECEMBER 1935 The chart on opposite page presents graphically the pay roll and employment indexes for wool textiles and for all manufactures for the past 3 years by months and for 3 more years by averages for the year. The following table sets forth the indexes of employment and pay rolls, the average hours worked, average hourly earnings, average weekly earnings (actual, full time, and adjusted) and the purchasing power of the dollar as published by the National Industrial Conference Board. Second, as to excessive hours.-The wool textile industry cannot be charged with working its employees excessive hours. The 40-hour week as established by the code and continued by the approved rules of business procedure has been observed by 95 percent of the industry. That is a conservative statement. Hours of work have not been increased except in a very few instances and then largely due to emergency conditions which were of a temporary nature. I might say at this point that during the operation of the code the administrator in Washington permitted a deviation in extraordinary circumstances from the hours and other provisions. We have contined the same practice by having a business conduct committee to pass upon those same applications. Attached hereto is also a copy of the rules of business procedure adopted by the industry. EXHIBIT C NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOOL MANUFACTURERS RULES OF BUSINESS PROCEDURE FOR THE WOOL TEXTILE INDUSTRY To Members of the Wool Textile Industry: Subject: Rules of business procedure for the wool textile industry. The new suggested rules of business procedure for the wool textile industry which retain most of the features of the old code of fair competition adopted under the N. I. R. A. are enclosed for your consideration. |