Senator LA FOLLETTE. Well, you were not there part of the time. Mr. TODD. No, sir. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Will you please confine your testimony to when you were there. Mr. TODD. He specifically stated that I had knowledge or had given orders for them to do so. Senator LA FOLLETTE. I though that he said Mr. Wheeler, but if he said you, go ahead. Mr. TODD. I thought he said me, but that isn't true. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Well, assume he said you. Make any statement you want to make about it, and the record will show. Mr. TODD. I have already made a statement. I deny that as being the truth. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Anything else? Mr. TODD. That is all. Senator LA FOLLETTE. You are excused. TESTIMONY OF JAMES L. WILLIAMS-Resumed Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Williams, have you any comment to make on Mr. Moore's testimony? Mr. WILLIAMS. I certainly have, Senator. In the first place he must be confused on his dates. We had no strike in Buffalo in 1934. We had one in October of 1933. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Where was that? Mr. WILLIAMS. Buffalo. Senator LA FOLLETTE. At Donner? Senator LA FOLLETTE. All right. Mr. WILLIAMS. As far as these outside men coming in, it is true. He mentioned that there were several cars used. As a matter of fact, there were 10 men and they were placed over in our parking lot on the opposite side of the street on Abbott Road, which is our property. Our employees parked their cars there, about 1,500, roughly, I would say, and there was a fight started out there. Our local men were confined within the plant and the whole police department of the city of Buffalo investigated that thoroughly and no one was arrested, no arrests were made. There wasn't anything to it. They were fighting among themselves. Incidentally, it was an out-and-out communist organization, the Steel and Metal Workers, or something like that, I don't know what it was, an affiliate of the Communist Party of America. The next thing, I can't understand how a fellow like Moore, who, in my opinion, is irresponsible and always has been, we inherited him some way through the mill Senator LA FOLLETTE (interposing). You inherited him from Mr. White. Mr. WILLIAMS. That is no credit to Mr. White anyhow. But he says he was out in this truck and that there were about 40 people. If my memory serves me rightly, I would be greatly sur prised if they could get more than 12 in that truck. If each man is carrying a gas gun, a bundle of pipe, and a few revolvers, and, what else did he say, a few bombs, I don't see how one individual could possibly handle all those things. I guess Todd covered the rest. As a matter of fact, I never talked to this fellow as he first testified that I had lined him up originally. I did not. Wheeler no doubt did, but I didn't. I didn't know him until after he was there for a matter of weeks. And as far as the organization of the Buffalo police department originally, we put a police department in there the latter part of April of 1933 or the first part of May, and the majority of those men were chosen from the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, with the exception of three men that were brought from some of the Republic plants, with Wheeler in charge. That is all I have got. Senator LA FOLLETTE. You are excused. I offer for the record an article which appeared in The Rotarian of July 1934 over the signature of Mr. Girdler. The entire article may be given an exhibit number and printed in the record in full. The document was marked "Exhibit 5224" and appears in the appendix on pp. 13920-13924.) Senator LA FOLLETTE. I read a portion: From propaganda put out by labor leaders, many people have, no doubt, gained the impression that the steel industry is opposed to collective bargaining. This is not true. The industry stands squarely in favor of the right and practice of collective bargaining with its employees. The point in controversy has to do with the form of collective bargaining which is to be adopted. The steel industry believes that the Employee Representation Plan represents the best form of collective bargaining for employees as well as employers, which has thus far been devised. Mr. GIRDLER. Would I be guilty of an unfair labor practice if I said that I still believe that? Senator LA FOLLETTE. No; I was going to ask you first if that was your opinion. Mr. GIRDLER. The best form of collective bargaining I have ever had anything to do with is the employee-representation plan. Senator LA FOLLETTE. When did Republic Steel Corporation institute an employee-representation plan? Mr. GIRDLER. The Republic Steel Corporation was formed and went into corporate existence on April 8, 1930. Mr. Wysor, who is now president of the corporation, had had a long service with the Bethlehem Steel Co. before he came with me in 1925, to Jones & Laughlin. Mr. Wysor knew a great deal about the employee-representation plan and was always urging that we start setting up a similar employeerepresentation plan to the one the Bethlehem Steel Corporation had. But we had a lot of troubles. There was a panic started, not the last panic, but the panic that started in 1929, the fall of 1929. We were a large unwieldy company with a lot of plant and a lot of organization problems, and although we talked about it a great deal we never got past the preliminary stages, we were carrying out the principle of the employee-representation plan but we didn't have a well-formed, wellorganized plan. The National Industrial Recovery Act and the famous section 7 (a), and all these things which get me alphabetically confused, finally got us to the point where we went ahead with an employee representation plan, and we did a very complete job, we thought, and still think, and got it into action very quickly, and had wonderful success with it. And at the time of the much-referred-to strike of 1937, just prior to that strike I don't think there was a happier, better satisfied set of steel employees in the United States than the Republic employees working under the employee-representation plan. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Do you recall that in your testimony before the Senate Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads, some observations were made on the subject of company unions and the employeerepresentation plan? Mr. GIRDLER. I don't recall them; we have it here; if you will tell me what page, I will be glad to refresh my memory. Senator LA FOLLETTE. On page 219 of the hearings under Senate Resolution 140, it states: Senator LA FOLLETTE (reading): Senator O'MAHONEY. You are aware, of course, Mr. Girdler, that a controversy has been going on over a great many years about the manner in which the so-called company unions are used for the purpose of defeating the objective of the collective bargaining and of enabling the employer company practically to fix his own working conditions and wages? Mr. GIRDLER. Yes, sir. Senator O'MAHONEY. You are aware of that, are you? Mr. GIRDLER. Oh, yes; I have read tomes on that. Senator O'MAHONEY. What is your opinion or the opinion of your corporate executives with respect to that question? Mr. GIRDLER. With respect to the so-called company union? Senator O'MAHONEY. Company union; yes, sir. Mr. GIRDLER. I do not recognize the words "company union," because I do not know anything about company unions. Senator O'MAHONEY. Do you have one Mr. GIRDLER (interposing). We had employees representation plan in the company. [Laughter.] Senator O'MAHONEY. Developed by the company? Mr. GIRDLER. Developed by the employees, not by the company. Mr. GIRDLER. The company dealt with them and up to the passage of the law which said we could not any longer do it; we gave them a very infinitesimal financial support on the basis of paving a man for the time he lost from his job when he was dealing for the men he represented, and for doing a certain amount of printing for them, and that sort of thing. On the passage of the law we withdrew that infinitesimal support completely. Senator LA FOLLETTE. I offer for the record an excerpt from the minutes of the board of directors of the Republic Steel Corporation of May 23, 1933. (The document was marked "Exhibit 5225" and appears in the appendix on p. 13924.) Senator LA FOLLETTE (reading): The chairman referred to the proposed industrial recovery bill pending in Congress and stated that executives of this corporation were cooperating with those of other steel companies in study of such legislation and recommendations thereunder. He further stated that the officers of the corporation were giving careful consideration to adoption of plan for employees representation. Senator LA FOLLETTE. I offer for the record another excerpt from the minutes of June 12, 1933. (The document was marked "Exhibit 5226" and appears in the appendix on p. 13924.) Senator LA FOLLETTE (reading): The chairman stated that the management of the corporation had been working very actively in the development of a plan of employees representation along the lines of the Bethlehem plan and proposed to put such plan in force as promptly as practicable, subject to the approval of the board of direc tors or of the executive committee. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and unanimously carried the officers were authorized to complete and inaugurate such a plan on the basis of the general principles of the Bethlehem plan, with such modification as they might deem advisable. Mr. Girdler, these excerpts from the minutes seem to indicate that the board was active in the inauguration of that plan? Was that true? Mr. GIRDLER. Mr. Senator, if you would like to have the full detail of the situation, Mr. Voss could tell you in detail. He is right here and he knows all about it. I will try to answer your question. Senator LA FOLLETTE. This reports what the chairman was saying at the meeting, and I though perhaps you could tell us. Mr. GIRDLER. Well, I was the chairman. As I say, through Mr. Wysor's advice and suggestion and knowledge of the situation, we were satisfied that the employee representation plan such as that of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation was a good plan, and Mr. Voss, in charge of that branch of offices, and people connected with Mr. Voss, talked to the employees of the company as to what they thought about having a system of employees representation, and he could tell you in detail how he did it. I could not. The board of directors was advised of it, and the board of directors was in sympathy with the idea. The board of directors did not have any more to do with the detail of it than the court reporter. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Girdler, in fact was the employees representation plan of the Republic Steel Corporation developed by the employees and not by the company, to use your own words? Mr. GIRDLER. Why, it was developed by the employees with suggestions and information given to them by Mr. Voss and his outfit, of course. You could not take a large mass of employees like that and say "Go form yourself an employees representation plan." We thought we were doing a service by giving them information on which they could base a plan. We called their attention to the Bethlehem plan, the American Rolling Mill plan, the Youngstown Sheet & Tube plan, and so forth. I say that Mr. Voss could give you all the detail on that. There is nothing mysterious about it at all, nothing mysterious or nothing sinister about it. As far as who formed the employees representation plan, the employees or the company, I say again, the employees. They were helped and given suggestions. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Girdler, I want to state for the record that there was nothing implied in my question that there was anything sinister about this matter, but in view of the testimony before this committee and these excerpts from the minutes and your statement about the condition of the corporation after it was organized prior to the time the company unions-employees representation plans-were introduced-I was endeavoring to reconcile the statement and the testimony and the excerpt from the board of directors' minutes. Mr. GIRDLER. I think if there is any difficulty about reconciling them, I will try to answer your question to the best of my ability. This was carried out the same way as group insurance, vacation plans, and all of the new things, innovations in the field of employee relationship. The employees were talked to and suggestions were made, they made the plans themselves, based upon information that we got for them and they got for themselves-both-from the companies that had successful plans. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Exhibit 4311 of this committee, certified to as correct by Mr. Boyer, shows that the Republic Steel Corporation expended in plans of employee representation during the period June 1933 to April 1937, a total of $392,120. Mr. GIRDLER. What is the figure? Senator LA FOLLETTE. $392,120. Mr. GIRDLER. Yes. Senator LA FOLLETTE. At the time you gave this testimony before the Post Office Committee, did you know how much the company had spent for employee representation plans before? Mr. GIRDLER. No; I did not. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you regard $392,120 over this period as a very infinitesimal financial support? Mr. GIRDLER. As compared to the pay roll and other expenditures of the company; absolutely, yes. Mr. PATTON. Mr. Senator, I want to clear up one thing, and this is so that there will be no misunderstanding about this. Senator LA FOLLETTE. I will be very glad if you will. Mr. PATTON. $392,000-you notice the heading says, "Including compensation paid to representatives of management and representatives of employees.' You have an industrial relations department whether you have the C. I. O., the A. F. of L., or an independent union, and you pay their expenses. When you are talking about the contributions actually made to the union itself for printing or for time spent in collective bargaining, you are not getting a figure of $392,000 by any means. Senator LA FOLLETTE. But that was the total cost of the plan, as I understood it, as submitted by the company and certified to by Mr. Boyer. Mr. GIRDLER. That was the total cost of the plan just as you have said, and a considerable portion of that cost would have been there if we had not adopted an employee representation plan, and a considerable portion would have been there had we signed a con |