Изображения страниц

which she cannot put on a hundred percent American. Would the Secretary of Commerce have the right then to accept that ship?

Mr. HADDOCK. Why shouldn't this body accept that ship instead of the Secretary of Commerce? Why put that power in one man's hand? I think some of those people have a little too much power today.

Sec. 2. That licenses issued by the Bureau of Navigation and Steamboat Inspection be required for wireless telegraphers Frankly, I do not know what the intention there is, and it is beyond me to conceive of just what the intent there is. Wireless telegraphers are at the present time licensed under the Federal Communications Commission. It is a competent authority, and the only competent authority that I know of in the United States to do such work, and I see no reason why that should be taken out of their jurisdiction and put in the Department of Commerce.

Sec. 3. That a three-watch system on the deck and in the engine room be made mandatory, and penalty provided for each offender, except as otherwise authorized by the Secretary of Commerce.

It is beyond me to understand why we would not at least go so far as to recommend an 8-hour day for a seaman if we are going to adopt 30, 35, and 40-hour weeks ashore. It is my opinion that a seaman should certainly at least have an 8-hour day, and particularly those seamen who have to do the safeguarding of life and property, and our recommendation there would be that an 8-hour day, not a threewatch system, be inaugurated for all classes of personnel aboard ship.

SEC. 4. That minimum wages of unlicensed personnel be determined by the Federal Maritime Authority. This recommendation shall not be construed as a denial of the right of employers and employees to bargain collectively in the matter of higher wages and better working conditions.

In connection with that, it is our opinion that the Federal Maritime Authority should have the right to determine all minimum wages, and that they should determine such minimum wages in accordance with wages paid in other maritime countries and based on the differential that exists in allied shore industries.

For example, we will assume that in England a metal worker in a shipyard makes $5 a day and a seaman makes $2 a day. That differential should be maintained in the minimum salaries applied to American seamen.

The CHAIRMAN. Why, if you are going to take a differential, do you refer to one class of industry? Are you going to take the differential in that fashion as applied to seamen?

Mr. HADDOCK. I was merely making a specific example. I would not merely compare the seamen in England with the iron worker in the shipyard, I would take several allied industries and average up the salaries of the employees there and compare them with the seamen and average up those same employees in the allied American industries and maintain the same differential as to minimum.

SEC. 5. That the question of wages and settlement of labor disputes be specifically made one of the functions of the Federal Maritime Authority.

And we concur in the rest of the report of this committee.

There are a few other questions here which in my opinion this committee should deal with, although under the specific recommendations here I believe they would have the authority, but I do not feel

that these things should be overlooked and that this Federal Maritime Authority should be given the duty of looking into this question.

One is the manning by American seamen. In our opinion the crew should be entirely American, not excluding the steward's department, which is recommended in this particular instance, and that this Government agency should have jurisdiction over subsidies and be given definite instructions to cancel any contracts that may exist where discriminatory wages are being paid or maintained.

One of the, I would say the most primary, need, as applied to seamen today, to make them better qualified and make them more satisfied aboard the vessels, is the setting up of a governmental agency whereby seamen obtained employment aboard vessels. I think very definitely that this is one step that must be taken. Today and in past years we have had many abuses of the American seamen. It is true that there is a law on the statute books today that makes it unlawful for any person to accept money from a seaman for obtaining a job for him. However, the many subterfuges that have grown up around this have in many instances made it almost impossible for a seaman to get a job without paying for it indirectly.

Mr. Culkin. I suppose that is particularly true of the steward's department. Mr. HADDOCK. I beg your pardon? Mr. CULKIN. In the steward's department on a passenger line? Mr. HADDOCK. I would not say it is particular true in the steward's department. I am no more conversant with the steward's department than others, but I do know that such condition does exist.

For instance, a company may have one particular man to hire all of their men.

This party has been known-and today the same condition exists—to run a rooming house and restaurant or a clothing store, and he will only give employment to those who patronize his business and he will charge exorbitant rates.

Mr. CULKIN. A survival of the old form of boarding houses, I suppose? Mr. HADDOCK. Well, it is not a revival of it. Mr. CULKIN. Survival.

Mr. HADDOCK. Survival; that is what it amounts to today. The man runs a rooming house. You go there, take a room, and pay a month's room rent, and he ships you out the next day and you don't get any room rent back:

The CHAIRMAN. Have we not something like the Sea Service Bureau that is under obligation to handle that? What is the objection to that?

Mr. Haddock. The Sea Service Bureau?
Mr. HADDOCK. That is the first I had ever heard of it.

The CHAIRMAN. The Sea Service Bureau in the Shipping Board that was so bitterly fought by some of the unions in which they attempted to place men?

Mr. HADDOCK. Our union has never fought any governmental body, I don't think, and we would certainly be in favor of the elimination of "crimping", and while I do not know that it is true, I have heard from members of labor organizations that "crimping" existed right in their own labor organizations. It does not exist in ours, and cannot, but that has been said of others. Whether it is true I do not

[ocr errors]

know. But in my opinion, if responsible governmental agencies were set up I think this maritime authority, Federal Maritime Authority, should have charge of the shipping offices, that that is one condition that could be eliminated, and certainly would eliminate a great amount of dissension that exists in the industry today.

The CHAIRMAN. Is Mr. Sanders in the room?
Mr. Haag. No, he is not.

The CHAIRMAN. He was connected with Sea Service. I was going to ask him about it.

Mr. HADDOCK. There are many ways in which this Sea Service you speak of could be operated. I do not mean that a seaman would have to pay tribute to the Sea Service or even go there for employment, but I would say that he could only be employed on a vessel after coming through the Sea Service Bureau, and that if he comes through the Sea Service Bureau from labor organizations or other organizations, they should make it their business to see that none of these discriminatory practices exist.

Mr. CULKIN. Does not that invite a new set of abuses?

Mr. HADDOCK. I do not know of any system other than the one we have in our organization today that eliminates abuses, and that is mainly this, that the workers in the industry elect a committee of unemployed workers who have been on the beach the shortest period of time and charge them with the duties of assigning to vessels under specific rules that have been laid down by the workers themselves. I know of no other manner in which these abuses can largely be eliminated, and still some abuses can creep in. But so far as a committee is concerned, that is going to handle the situation, a committee of workers is going to see that fairer play is given than one worker, or especially one who is not a worker. In our organization in the different locals they elect the men on the committee. They cannot take a job as long as they are on the committee. When it comes close to their turn they resign from the committee and someone else is elected to the committee from the bottom.

Mr. Culkin. The men longest ashore get the first jobs?

Mr. HADDOCK. No; not necessarily, because a man may be on shore a good deal and still not become in line to get the job. Mr. Culkin. Your idea is to base it more or less on length of service?

Mr. HADDOCK. That is the first consideration, seniority. That eliminates the practice from officials of union or anyone else. I would not go out and make an assignment of one of our radio operators to a job if I could get out of it at all, because, whether or not favoritism were shown, the crime may become started, and I know positively that a large number of companies have started such propaganda against the unions for no other reason than to break them by stating that the officials are showing favoritism or are taking money for jobs, and so forth.

Now, that may be the answer to the story that has been brought to me by certain members of unions that their officials are crooked. There is no doubt in my mind that there are labor officials who are crooked. Who they are I do not know. We all know that they have existed.

The CHAIRMAN. That exists everywhere, does it not?

Mr. Haddock. That will continue to exist. But as long as the members of that organization exercise their true democratic rights that crooked official cannot exist for long.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Anything else?

Mr. HADDOCK. I have nothing else, except I have one observation that I would like to make that I did not make when our distinguished Representative from New York was questioning me about the hours radio operators were employed. I would like to state that the Federal Communications Commission has been given the duty of making recommendations for legislation to Congress. They have not availed themselves of this opportunity insofar as legislation for safety of life at sea is concerned because of the status of the safety of life at sea treaty. They do not know whether that treaty is going to be passed or not. The CHAIRMAN. Is that dealt with in that treaty?

Mr. HADDOCK. Some of it. If the treaty is passed a great amount of that will be taken care of, and the Commission will then recommend additional legislation. But if it does not pass, then they will recommend parallel legislation in addition to legislation that is not contained therein.

Mr. SIROVICH. As a matter of fact, if it does not pass there is considerable of the matter that is contained in the treaty that ought to be taken out and made the subject of separate legislation?

Mr. HADDOCK. That is very true, but I am very much afraid that perhaps the treaty may be being delayed by the interests who do not want such legislation introduced at this time because they fear it would be looked upon very favorably by Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. That thing has been pending before the Senate for many Congresses past; so that criticism would hardly apply, because it has been under consideration for many years.

Mr. HADDOCK. Has it ever come out of committee before?
The CHAIRMAN. I do not know that it has.

Mr. HADDOCK. It is my understanding that it has been held in committee. In my opinion it should be either definitely killed or definitely passed, so that the public will know exactly what the status of the adequate legislation is.

The CHAIRMAN. I quite agree with you. Is there an N. R. A. code authority relating to steamships at all, or mercantile merchant marine?

Mr. HADDOCK. Unfortunately, the Government was not strong enough to make shipping interests adopt a code.

The CHAIRMAN. I am not sure that that criticism would be exactly just or not. I do not know what the cause was.

Mr. HADDOCK. I beg your pardon?

The CHAIRMAN. I say, I am not so sure whether that criticism would be in order. I understood they agreed on a code.

Mr. SIROVICH. Did the labor unions ever attempt to force the companies and the Government to get together on a code? Was the voice of labor articulate or inarticulate?

Mr. HADDOCK. I will say this, that our organization and every other maritime organization spent very valuable time and considerable money in attempting to get that done.

Mr. SIROVICH. What happened to all your work?
Mr. HADDOCK. We do not know.
Mr. Sirovich. Who did you see?

Mr. HaddOCK. I have spoken to several Senators. We spoke to the different parties in the N. R. A. that had jurisdiction over this question.

Mr. SIROVICH. Did you bring this to the attention of General Johnson?

Mr. HADDOCK. Yes, it was brought to the attention of General Johnson.

Mr. SIROVICH. What did he say about it?
Mr. Culkin. It probably is not fit to repeat.

Mr. HADDOCK. Yes, I will repeat it. "The question is being considered." That is about the only thing you can get out of General Johnson.

I would like to state also in connection with that the same thing came up insofar as our particular organization was concerned, with the communications industries. There the same question was being considered, but the industry did go ahead and adopt a code through a subterfuge. They adopted the P. R. A. and amended it to suit themselves, without labor having any voice whatsoever in the amendments; and that P. R. A. is still in effect and no code is being adopted, evidently because labor does want to have some voice in it.

Mr. SIROVICH. What does the “P.R. A." mean?

Mr. HADDOCK. “President's Reemployment Agreement”, which calls for a 40-hour week. The communications companies amended that to a 48-hour week except in places where there are three or less employees concerned, and they could be worked any number of hours. • Mr. Sirovich. That applies to you?

Mr. HADDOCK. That does.
Mr. SIROVICH. That is why you have to work 12 to 15 hours?

Mr. HADDOCK. No, that does not apply on ships. The communication companies do not pay wages to radio operators on ships, although they do hire and fire them under the subterfuge of nominating, and that has been one of our greatest handicaps. You go to a steamship company with a view to talking wages and working conditions and they will tell you, “Oh, we have nothing at all to do with that. The radio companies handle all of our radio matters.”

We go to the radio companies. “We have nothing to do with it. We merely nominate the men." But when it comes to the question of obtaining a job you have to answer to both of them. When it comes to a question of being fired, you have to answer to both of them.

Mr. SIROVICH. Do they have a blacklist against men like yourself and others who are advancing the cause of labor?

Mr. Haddock. I do not think there is a blacklist against me, because I have been offered numerous jobs, in fact better jobs than before I quit and became president of this organization. But there are blacklists against certain members of our organization.

Mr. CULKIN. Is that effective?

Mr. HADDOCK. In some instances it is, but there are other instances when it is not, and there are cases of discrimination.

Mr. CULKIN. How many of the groups in the merchant field are organized? Your group is organized, but are the marine engineers organized?

Mr. HADDOCK. It depends upon what you call organized. There is an organization

Mr. ČULKIN. Have you a recognized organization?

Mr. HADDOCK. Every group of seamen is represented by some form of an organization. Taking it right down from the top, we have in the engineers the Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association. We

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »