Mr. CLASON. Then the method of payment would not be a controlling factor in any way?

Mr. HORROCKS. No, but it might be a determining factor, though, in separating men who work from men who supervise.

Mr. CLASON. Practically every Government employee in the city. of Washington is on a per annum basis.

Mr. HORROCKS. But they are not directing the efforts of others. Mr. CLASON. Then the per annum basis does not mean anything. Mr. COSTELLO. It would not be a conclusive definition but it might be a method of determining the line of demarcation.

Mr. KILDAY. What is the name of your organization?
Mr. HORROCKS. The National Association of Foremen.

Mr. KILDAY. And what is the name of the organization which Mr. Keyes is the head of?

Mr. HORROCKS. I think it is the National Association of Foremen of America.

Mr. KILDAY. I understood him to say that it was the largest association of foremen in America and that they had about 15,000 members. Did I understand you to say that you had 60,000 members?

Mr. HORROCKS. We are implementing about 60,000 and the National Council of Foremens Clubs of the Y. M. C. A. I would guess would take care of another 15,000 or 16,000.

Mr. KILDAY. How old is your organization?

Mr. HORROCKS. It started back in 1918 sporadically and it grew up until there were sufficient members to incorporate in October 8, 1925. Mr. KILDAY. You are not affiliated with any labor organization? Mr. HORROCKS. No, sir; we are not.

Mr. KILDAY. You are thoroughly independent of any other organization?

Mr. HORROCKS. That is right.

Mr. MARTIN. You understand that the Smith bill does not limit any of the functions of your organization?

Mr. HORROCKS. It does not, to my understanding.

Mr. MARTIN. If it does interfere in any way with the functioning of your organization do you still favor the Smith bill?

Mr. HORROCKS. I favor it because it is going to clear the fog and lift the mist and show us definitely where we belong and where our loyalties tie up.

Mr. MARTIN. The Smith bill is rather far reaching in its control of supervisory personnel as to what you can and cannot do and you have examined the Smith bill and you have come to the decision that it does not interfere with your functioning as a separate organization of foremen?

Mr. HORROCKS. It does not.

Mr. MARTIN. It won't limit any of your activities whatever?

Mr. HORROCKS. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Durham?

Mr. DURHAM. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Sheridan?

Mr. SHERIDAN. You say that you want this fog cleared up. I did not get your name, sir.

Mr. HORROCKS. My name is Horrocks.

Mr. SHERIDAN. You say you want this fog cleared up as to what constitutes foremen? What would be your definition?

Mr. HORROCKS. My definition of foreman is one who supervises the work of others who produce goods.

Mr. SHERIDAN. Well, do you include in that one who is an executive? Mr. HORROCKS. Absolutely.

Mr. SHERIDAN. Would you want a line of demarcation between what constitutes a foreman and an executive in an office?

Mr. HORROCKS. We make no such distinction in our association; no, sir.

Mr. SHERIDAN. You include the vice president and so forth in foremen, too?

Mr. HORROCKS. We do.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fenton.

Mr. FENTON. What are the qualifications for becoming a member of your organization?

Mr. HORROCKS. The qualifications are that a man must be actively engaged in the supervision of other work in industry or commerce, other men's work.

Mr. FENTON. And before you became active in this organization what was your title?

Mr. HORROCKS. Sir?

Mr. FENTON. What was your work before you became interested in this?

Mr. HORROCKS. I left college and joined the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and became production foreman and production engineer and personnel manager of the Goodyear Flying Squadron. When the Goodyear Industrial University was incorporated I was picked to conduct that work and I trained 43,000 men in that industry in professional work. At the present time I am engaged in public relations work.

Mr. FENTON. Is it necessary for a member of your organization to have gone through the ranks of employees in order to become a foreman?

Mr. HORROCKS. Well, sometimes a man comes right in out of school and becomes a staff man. You see, we take in industry three lines of management. There is the military type of organization which would indicate that that man had to come in as an employee and be upgraded. There is the staff or functional type of organization which might bring him in, as in the chemical industry where they probably would not have any foreman, as a technical specialist. As long as he supervised the work of others he would be acceptable.

Then there is by far the finest work group which is what we call the line and staff organization which is a combination of the military and the staff specialist. The foreman has to deal not only with his production chief but with the technical experts and specifications and development and with the personnel department and with the efficiency department, and so forth.

Mr. MARTIN. Does your organization engage in collective bargaining?

Mr. HORROCKS. No, sir. In 1936 on the insistence of some of our own members we tried to steer away from that question but finally we were forced to make a declaration and that is incorporated since 1937 in our constitution and bylaws and if I can find it here I would like to read it for you. This was by unanimous consent in 1937. The National Association of Foremen emphasizes to the member

clubs that the association exists to disseminate knowledge concerning economic, technical, and management problems among the foremen. The association takes no part in collective bargaining and its individual member clubs are ineligible to belong to collective bargaining organizations. Any local chapter or foremen's club participating in any degree in a labor controversy as a collective bargaining agency will be immediately deprived of its charter and its members will automatically cease to be members of the national association.

We believe that your labor leaders and top management are the ones that could and should negotiate.

Mr. MARTIN. Do you have any agency at all to bargain collectively concerning problems affecting foremen?

Mr. HORROCKS. Yes; in your various plants you have factory or bargaining councils. At any time any man may bring up anything that is a problem to it, whether it is a departmental or personal problem.

Mr. MARTIN. You consider that as collective bargaining?

Mr. HORROCKS. No; I would say individual bargaining, sir.

Mr. MARTIN. That is what I asked you, sir, if you had any organization or group in position to do any collective bargaining in behalf of problems affecting foremen?

Mr. HORROCKS. No, sir. We consider ourselves so intimately a part of the family that the problems are talked over mutually.

Mr. MARTIN. And the fact that you have no collective bargaining at all then takes you out of the provisions of the Smith bill?

Mr. HORROCKS. As far as the collective bargaining is concerned; yes. Mr. MARTIN. The functioning that your organization does, then, does not bring you within any provision in the Smith bill so far as you know?

Mr. HORROCKS. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Horrocks, let us assume I am an unemployed foreman seeking a job and I go to the General Motors Corporation and offer my services and the question is raised whether I am worth $200 or $600 a month. And finally I agree with Mr. Wilson that I am worth $400 a month and he agrees to it and he employs me. is a bargain concluded between two individuals, is it not? Mr. HORROCKS. That is right, sir.

That

The CHAIRMAN. And I have elected to do that, whereas the organized group on the other side has elected, as between individual bargaining and the right to bargain collectively with the group, to choose the latter. Doesn't that give a man the right to say, to begin with, whether he wants collective bargaining or does not want it, and when he elects what he wants don't you think he ought to be bound by that election?

Mr. HORROCKS. We consider ourselves so bound, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What have you to say about the efficiency of management where the supervisory personnel down to and including the foremen is organized and affiliated with the workers over whom they exercise supervision? Is that a sound procedure?

Mr. HORROCKS. That would be an impossible situation, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And that is based on your long years of experience in public relations and in labor relations in the foremen's organization? Mr. HORROCKS. That is right, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And that has been since 1918?

Mr. HORROCKS. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. Prior to that what did you do?

Mr. HORROCKS. I attended college.

The CHAIRMAN. How old are you now?

Mr. HORROCKS. I am 52 years of age.

Mr. JOHNSON. Along the lines that the chairman asked, do you think an individual foreman that goes up to the vice president of General Motors Corporation is on a fair and equal bargaining basis with that man?

Mr. HORROCKS. Why, absolutely. We have a specific case concerning Mr. B. D. Kunkel who was a foreman when he became president of the Dayton Foreman's Club and he is today vice president of General Motors. The first president was T. H. Fordham also in the supervisional line and now president and general manager of the Lincoln Electric Co.

Mr. JOHNSON. They have worked their way up. That does not answer the specific question I asked you. In the Ford plant there was a man who said he represented 8,000 foremen. Do you think any individual foreman could go up to the Ford office and be on an equal basis with the man there in bargaining?

Mr. HORROCKS. No; I do not. I get your question now. I do not. Mr. JOHNSON. As a matter of fact, he would have to take whatever the Ford scale was; would he not?

Mr. HORROCKS. Individually set for him, sir. These salaries are by no means in certain definite brackets. I know of one foreman whose department produced $180,000,000 worth of products and I know that that foreman would be able to match his wits or talk with some of the best top management in the country.

Mr. JOHNSON. I do not doubt that at all, because he is one of the top. He is a foreman?

Mr. HORROCKS. He is still a foreman, sir.

Mr. MARTIN. Is that a common experience in your organization that foremen are capable of doing that?

Mr. HORROCKS. They are except where you have some new supervision brought about by this new mushroom growth in the aircraft and other industries turning out implements of war and where we find them they are so desperately hungry to get the answers and to grow in the right direction and be skilled handlers of men.

Mr. MARTIN. Now, in problems of hours of employment as well as wages, suppose a problem comes up involving the welfare of the foremen themselves, do you advocate they deal with those problems on an individual basis?

Mr. HORROCKS. That is the only way I think is right.

Mr. MARTIN. You think that individual bargaining regarding hours and wages and working conditions affecting foremen is adequate for all purposes?

Mr. HORROCKS. Except where the Congress or other authority have tied our hands it is sometimes necessary for foremen to put in many extra hours of work and he gets no remuneration for it. Under the wage and salary limitation he cannot be paid extra.

Mr. MARTIN. And if there are such cases as that you still advocate that the foremen should take up their cases individually in every case? Mr. HORROCKS. Yes; I do.

Mr. MARTIN. And if they violate that do you favor the suspension of their deferment for military service and legislating them into the armed forces for any attempt to vary from that principle of individual bargaining?

Mr. HORROCKS. Absolutely not.

Mr. MARTIN. You are not in favor of legislating them into the Army by removing their deferment for any violation?

Mr. HORROCKS. Absolutely not.

Mr. MARTIN. Then you are not in total agreement with the Smith bill?

Mr. HORROCKS. I said only as regards this foremen's classification. (Whereupon there was discussion off the record.)

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will now adjourn to meet at 10:30 on Monday morning.

(Whereupon the committee adjourned until 10:30 a. m., Monday, April 12, 1943.)