The independent union is not as apt to have its workers become involved in jurisdictional disputes, sympathetic strikes, etc. On the other hand, there is some feeling on the part of leading personnel people, who are dealing in certain operations with both, that the independent unions are more aggressive in character and are making more widespread demands than are either the A. F. of L. unions or the C. I. O. unions. They feel, however, that this may be just a temporary phase. Personally I believe that the independent union is to be preferred to either union, assuming that the employer must or wishes to deal with some kind of a union. Secretary, National Ass'n of Mfgrs., Eleven West Forty-Second St., New York, New York. DEAR MR. SARGENT: You, no doubt, have seen some of the recent publicity that has been given to a "tar and feather" party in Tampa in which several labor Socialist Communist agitators were taken out for a beating and which unfortunately resulted in the death of one of those who received the flogging. The American Federation of Labor stepped into the picture and officially announced that unless the Tampa Authorities made a thorough investigation of the affair and arrested the guilty parties, the A. F. of L. would cancel its plans to hold its next convention in Tampa. I would like to ask you for some information and advice concerning this. Is it not true that the city where the A. F. of L. holds its convention is always visited by a delegation of A. F. of L. Organizers with a concentrated unionizing campaign? Does not the cause of the "Open Shop" always suffer a serious set-back in such cities as a result of the A. F. of L. convention? If this be true, would it be wise for the Industries and Employers of Tampa to use this threat of the A. F. of L. as an excuse, and force this affair into such a muddle that the A. F. of L. convention would be withdrawn? I believe it would be logical and reasonable for certain Civic organizations of Tampa to adopt resolutions of resentment at the A. F. of L. butting into the Law enforcement affairs of the city of Tampa, and making threats of what they will do, etc., condemning the unwarranted criticism and unfavorable publicity given to Tampa by such threats and their publicity throughout the country. If. in your judgment, this would seem a wise course of action immediately while the A. F. of L. Executive Committee are in session in Miami, please let me known and send me as definite information as possible on the effects of the A. F. of L. Convention on the Labor Relations in the cities where they are held. With assurance of our appreciation, I am Very sincerely, ETL:C (Signed) E. T. LAY, Executive Secretary. JANUARY 21, 1936. Mr. E. T. LAY, Graham Building, Jacksonville, Florida. DEAR MR. LAY: This will acknowledge yours of January 14. I think the best answer I can give is to say that after several years of observations I think a community is just as well off-perhaps better off-if it does not have an A. F. of L. convention. I think your sugestion about having civic organizations of Tampa adopt resolutions against A. F. of L. interference is sound. There is no specific information which can be obtained as to the effects of A. F. of L. conventions in other cities, but the above is based on general observations and impressions. I think it is better to take such action following the meeting in Tampa and not actually while it is going on. Secretary, National Associations of Manufacturers, 11 West 42nd Street, New York, N. Y. MY DEAR MR. SARGENT: I have been following your bulletins and have been very much interested in them for many years. I have before me your bulletin of April 12, 1937, Studies of Labor Problems, etc. and I have been wondering whether it would be possible or at all feasible for the manufacturers to enter into an agreement with the A. F. of L. organization, whereby we would recognize them under certain conditions as against the arbitrary and radical activities of the other organizations. It seems to me that the A. F. of L. would be a much safer organization for the manufacturer to affiliate with than the other. If the other organization accomplishes anywhere near what they are driving at, it seems to me it is going to be a very serious situation, not only for all manufacturers, but for the country itself. I would be very pleased to have your views in regard to something of this character. With kind regards, Sincerely yours, WFH: ms. 1Cf. exhibit 5438. (Signed) THE BRIDGEPORT HARDWARE MFG. CORP., DEAR Mr. HOBBS: I was pleased to receive your letter of May 25 since I have very pleasant recollections of meeting you several times during the past few years. The Association as such has, and I think properly, no preference as between the A, F. of L. and the C. I. O. Personally I am inclined to believe manufacturers compelled to choose between the two labor organizations should prefer the A. F. of L. The C. I. O. group is obviously more radical and more politically minded than the A. F. of L. Demand for the check-off is mostly confined to the C. I. O. groups.. I am inclined to think that when the next depression comes along the C. I. O.. unless it has the check-off, will find its membership declining very rapidly: of course, if it has so many members when the depression begins that even a decline of 50% would still leave it in control of the labor situation, we still would be in a very bad situation. I dislike the A. F. of L. and all of its works, but as between the two organizations it has more reasonable leadership and there is more opportunity of working out satisfactory agreements. It must be borne in mind, of course, that in a good many cases the C. I. O. is quite willing to make reasonable agreements, but in a year or so their demands probably would become quite extreme. The possibility of easy agreements to start may delude many employers to a false sense of security with reference to C. I. O. dealings. You will appreciate, of course, that these are purely my personal comments. EXHIBIT 5441 [N. A. M. Bulletin Form] NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS OF THE UNITED STATES The attached reprint from the Chicago Tribune1 epitomizes the information contained in a Senate Document of 1924. Additional copies for large scale distribution are available at $5.00 per thousand. EXHIBIT 5442 ACKSHAND KNITTING CO. INC. MANUFACTURERS OF BALLSTON KNITTED GLOVES AND MITTENS New York Office, 347 Fifth Ave., Room 1101 BALLSTON SPA, N. Y., June 10, 1987. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS, Investment Bldg., Washington, D. C. (Attention: Mr. Smethurst) GENTLEMEN: I am writing to you at the suggestion of Mr. Brissette, with whom I was in conversation today with reference to the enclosed. They have 1 See pt. 18, p. 7839, and exhibit 3885-I. distributed upwards of 100,000 of this material to various manufacturers. ACA: MS. JUNE 15, 1937. Mr. A. C. ACKERMAN, Ackshand Knitting Co. Inc., Ballston Spa, New York, N. Y. DEAR MR. ACKERMAN: This will acknowledge your letter of June 10th inclosing copy of reprint from the Chicago Sunday Tribune of March 28th.1 You inquire whether distribution of this material would in any way constitute a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. While Section 8 (1) of that law makes it unlawful for any employer "to interfere with, restrain or coerce employees" in the exercise of their right to form, join or assist labor organizations, and while the National Labor Relations Board has apparently adopted the view that propaganda or statements discrediting labor organizations reflects the employers hostility toward them, and may constitute a form of interference, we have very serious doubts whether the courts would ever place such a broad construction on the Act. In our opinion, if distribution of material of this character was the sole question involved in a complaint alleging violation of the Act, the employer would be exonerated. In making material of this kind available no restraint or coercion is exerted on the employees which would compel them against their will to refrain from joining or participating in any labor organization. In making material of this kind available it seems to me you are merely providing information which may be read or not, and if read may be entirely discounted. I see it, you are merely presenting one side of the question which every employee is entitled to know before making his own decision. If material of this character influences that decision I cannot see that it constitutes any form of coercion or undue influence whatever. As What I have said, of course, relates solely to the legal question involved in distributing material of this kind. Whether it should be done in any particular situation is entirely a matter of policy which every employer must decide for himself, bearing in mind his relationship with his employees and any past experience in making information available to them on current public questions. Very truly yours, DEAR MR. DODGE: At the meeting of the Council considerable interest was' shown regarding the forms of ballots which have been used by the National 'Exhibit 3885-1, pt. 18, at p. 8096. Labor Board in determining the employees' representative for collective bargaining. We are forwarding for your information the only two forms which have come to our notice up to the present time. Would you please let us have copies of any other form of ballot which might have come to your attention. C. Very truly yours, [Copy] WALTER B. WEISENBURGER, Executive Vice President. NATIONAL LABOR BOARD BALLOTS These two forms have actually been used in Labor Board elections and so far as we know are the only two forms in use. Do you choose to be represented in collective bargaining with the Yes--- No----- Company by the Blank union? Which do you choose as your collective bargaining representative? Blank Union Blank Employee Association MINUTES OF EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMITTEE1 EXHIBIT 5444 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS OF THE UNITED STATES General Offices: 11 West 42d Street, New York City MINUTES OF JOINT MEETING OF OPEN SHOP AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMITTEES HELD AT GENERAL OFFICES, NEW YORK CITY, JULY 12, 1933 ATTENDANCE Mr. Messrs. Willard, Lovejoy, Carr, A. P. Smith, Coburn (represented by Robbins), G. A. Smith, McMath, Elliston, Drew and Sargent (Secretary). Willard acted as presiding officer. LABOR ANALYSIS The meeting decided that it would be inadvisable to publish at this time a detailed analysis of the labor sections of the National Industrial Recovery Act. NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENTS Suggested letter to all state and local employers Associations: Confidential. To the Association Addressed: The Employment Relations and Open Shop Committees of the National Association of Manufacturers, meeting in joint session, requested me to suggest 1 See also exhibits 3809, 5258-D, 5259-B, 5259-H, 5428, and 5478. These minutes do not cover all the meetings of the committee. 2 See pt. 17, p. 7377. |