SEAMEN'S BILL OF RIGHTS 1 MONDAY, JUNE 2, 1947 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 1 OF THE COMMITTEE ON MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee convened at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, Hon. Willis W. Bradley (chairman) presiding. Present: Messrs. Bradley (chairman), Maloney, Allen, Havenner. TATEMENTS OF JAMES V. McCANDLESS, ASSISTANT TO COMMISSIONER, UNITED STATES MARITIME COMMISSION; C. W. SANDERS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MARINE DIVISION; PAUL JACKSON; AND DONALD R. HORN, ALL OF THE MARITIME COMMISSIONResumed Mr. BRADLEY. Gentlemen, the committee will come to order. First I would like to express here the great and sincere regret of this bcommittee of the death of our committee chairman, the Honorable red Bradley, and to say meetings of all subcommittees of the Comittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries were adjourned during the st week as a mark of respect to our late chairman. I would note further in the record that the subcommittees are meetg now without a full committee chairman having been appointed. I have here a telegram from the executive secretary, American abor Party, which urges passage of this bill. Without objection I ould like to make it a part of the record. (The following is a copy of the telegram referred to :) ngressman FRED BRADLEY, May 19, 1947. Chairman, Att Subcommittee of Maritime Operations and Labor, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: In behalf of the State Committee of the American Labor Party, I respectfully ge favorable report on H. R. 476. Opponents of this measure have attempted give the impression that the issue is whether or not to grant to merchant amen the same benefits as are granted to armed service veterans under the GI 1 of rights. This is not the issue. The purpose of H. R. 476 is to provide vilian-type benefits, including hospitalization, death, and disability benefits, gently needed to aid in the rehabilitation of merchant seamen who rendered agnificent service during the war. I respectfully recommend prompt and favorle action by the subcommittee and the full committee. A memorandum in pport of this request is being forwarded under separate cover. ARTHUR SCHUTZER, Executive Secretary, American Labor Party. 255 Mr. BRADLEY. I have here, also, a petition from the United States Marine Hospital Annex, Rockaway Beach, Long Island, signed by 134 disabled merchant seamen now hospitalized with tuberculosis said to have been contracted during service on board American ships. Without objection I would like to have that put into the record. (The following is a copy of the petition referred to:) UNITED STATES MARINE HOSPITAL ANNEX, CHAIRMAN, MARITIME OPERATIONS AND LABOR SUBCOMMITTEE, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. SIR: We, the undersigned wartime disabled merchant seamen, all of whom are now hospitalized with tuberculosis contracted during service aboard American ships, urge upon you the passage of the Merchant Seamen Wartime Service Act, H. R. 476. Approximately 50 percent of the undersigned are under 30 years of age. Our education was interrupted by the war when we answered the call to serve in the defense of our country. Many of us were rejected by the armed services due to minor physical defects which were waived by the War Shipping Administration. Nevertheless, as civilians, we served under the most hazardous war con ditions and in combat areas worked side by side with enlisted men in the armed services. More fortunate ones who sailed throughout the war, surviving tor pedoing and bombing without sustaining injury therefrom but who later sue cumbed to illness of such insidious nature as tuberculosis and other diseases, are not eligible for merchant marine war risk insurance. Moreover, other civilian Government employees serving overseas secured benefits under the United States Employees Compensation Commission for death, illness, or injury sus tained in the course of their employment. As wartime disabled merchant seamen our futures are without a fair measure of security. Our families are dependent upon public assistance during our disability periods, the average of which ex tends over a year or two. The present vocational rehabilitation benefits under the States' programs offered to merchant seamen are inadequate for those of us whose college train ing was interrupted by service in the merchant marine. H. R. 476, based on length of service in the merchant marine during the war period, will enable us to prepare ourselves for economic and social usefulness to our families and our communities. Respectfully, (Signed by the 134 disabled merchant seamen now hospitalized with tuberculosis, said to have been contracted during service on board American ships.) Do you Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. McCandless, on the day of our last meeting we were still discussing the report of the Maritime Commission. have exactly the point to which you had proceeded? Mr. MCCANDLESS. It is my recollection that we had just completed describing the four groups of persons generally who would be covered by the bill under section 101 (h), page 5. Mr. BRADLEY. That is right. My records show that you had arrived at just the top of section 102, on page 5. I would like very much to complete the hearings on this bill by the end of next week, so I personally will try to bother you as little as possible as we go along. Mr. MCCANDLESS. I would be glad to have you ask any questions as we go along, sir. [Reading:] Section 102 provides for the issuance of certificates of maritime wartime service to those who have rendered such service. These certificates are the basis of eligibility for benefits under the bill. The section sets forth the con ditions for their issuance. Paragraph (a) of section 102 provides that cer tificates shall be issued by the Chairman of the United States Maritime Commission and that (1) applications shall be submitted prior to March 2, 1948, and (2) applications for certificates of maritime wartime service must be citizens or prior to July 4, 1946, nationals of the United States, or bona fide residents of the United States eligible for citizenship who have taken out their first naturalization papers prior to March 2, 1946. Section 102 (a) (3) defines the qualifying period of wartime maritime service necessary to establish the basis of eligibility for a certificate of maritime wartime service. Due to the peculiarity of the maritime service a fixed period of continuous service followed by an honorable discharge is not possible. Although Public Law 87, Seventy-eighth Congress, as amended by Public Laws 660 and 692 of the Seventy-ninth Congress, provides for a certificate of substantially continuous service for men in the merchant marine and in the United States maritime service as qualification for the reemployment rights, the method there used in defining the qualifying period of wartime service does not cover certain groups deserving of consideration under H. R. 476. Mr. BRADLEY. May I ask there, Mr. McCandless, you have said "as qualification for reemployment rights." Will you explain what eemployment rights are covered by that phrase? Mr. MCCANDLESS. The rights to be reemployed by an employer when an individual has left employment other than temporary to enter he merchant marine upon release from such service. There is also provision for the reemployment of such persons by he Federal Government and other political subdivisions. It followed very substantially the reemployment rights of persons vho leave their employment to enter the armed forces, and through mendment of Public Law 87 provision has been made to reserve the eemployment rights of those persons who left their employment to nter either the armed services or the merchant marine, and before eturning to private civilian employment have served in the other. Mr. BRADLEY. Then does a merchant seaman who holds a certificate f substantially continuous service have practically the same reemloyment rights that a veteran of the armed services has? Mr. MCCANDLESS. Substantially the same; yes, sir. Mr. BRADLEY. Thank you. Mr. MCCANDLESS. You will see in our comments that due to the mendment of Public Law 87 as effected by these two statutes the rovisions in H. R. 476 may well be stricken out. [Continues reading:] A provision based almost solely on length of service would exclude, for examle, seamen permanently disabled during their war service but who may not have rved the necessary length of time. These individuals should be entitled to isability allowances. The bill provides three alternative qualifications to cover 1 possible situations necessary to be included. The prime qualifying requirement substantially continuous service between December 7, 1941, and March 2, 1946. he requirements which would constitute substantially continuous service are, ader the bill, a matter of regulation to be determined by the administering gency, subject, however, to the statutory requirement that the period served ust be not less than 6 months, and substantially continuous in that it must › not less than 9 months in each 12 months' period, or a proportional part of eriods of less than 12 months from the beginning of maritime wartime service ntil March 2, 1946. The second alternative requirement permits seamen to qualify who were no nger needed and who were therefore duly released from service by administrave action. Thus, one who, although suffering from no disability, because of age r other reason found the hardships of shipping out during wartime beyond his apacity would be qualified if no longer needed in the industry. The restrictions n administrative releases from the industry during the war were strict and were ot given except for valid reasons. The third alternative requirement allows for eligibility without regard to the uration of service if disability or death was incurred in, or aggravated by, mariime war service, or if the seaman was detained by the enemy. Under section 102 (b) the Chairman is allowed discretion in issuing certificates o citizens or nationals in cases where denial would be against equity or good onscience. This provision provides for meeting unusual cases where strict pplication of arbitrary requirements might work hardships. Mr. BRADLEY. I think we discussed that paragraph before. I would like again to interject my ideas that the inclusion of that provision might work a great many more hardships against the Government than the exclusion of it would work against the individuals. That is, of course, just my own personal opinion. Mr. MCCANDLESS. May I respond? I am merely saying that would depend upon the disposition of the individual charged with the administration of it. Mr. ALLEN. How many cases, if you can approximate it, would the omission of that section be likely to effect? Mr. MCCANDLESS. In answer to your question, in my opinion the discretionary authority given to the Chairman under section 102 (b) would very likely be construed with some strictness and would not be exercised, except in clear-cut cases, and would in my opinion not exceed in number more than 100. That, of course, is subject to modification depending upon the number of hardship cases which may be presented and the disposition of those given the administration of this bill. [Continues reading.] Under section 102 (c), certificates of maritime wartime service would be denied to seamen guilty of mutiny, treason, or sabotage, misconduct which caused revocation of license or other shipping papers, or dishonorable discharge from the United States maritime service or from the academies or schools under the jurisdiction or supervision of the War Shipping Administration. Sections 103, 104, and 105 provide for endorsements on the certificates for disability, death, or release from the service, respectively. These endorsements are to be entered on a finding by the Chairman that the disability (the extent of which shall be stated, subject to review) or death was incurred in or aggravated by maritime wartime service, or in the case of a release endorsement that the services of the seamen were no longer necessary. None of these endorse ments would be granted where death, disability, or release were related to misconduct. Section 106 provides for physical examinations by a medical officer of the United States in connection with establishing eligibility to disability endorse ments, and sets forth broadly the procedures to be followed by the Chairman in connection with the conduct of such examinations, including a system of appeals. Mr. BRADLEY. At our last meeting, Mr. McCandless, I made the statement that as far as I know midshipmen at the Naval Academy and cadets at West Point did not have the benefit of the GI bill of rights as I recall it. I realize that we all make mistakes, but I want to be sure that the record is complete without any misrepresentation I have since been shown where service at the Naval Academy and at West Point is to be considered as military service during the war but I have not yet had information as to whether or not that service is included under the benefits of the so-called GI bill of rights. Do you know the answer to that question as yet? Mr. MCCANDLESS. Yes, sir. The cadets and the midshipmen are entitled to all of the benefits administered by the Veterans' Adminis tration, which includes the GI bill of rights. There is this exception to their full participation, however, in veterans' benefits, and that is that the length of time which they spent at one or the other of the Academies, or in the Army specialized-training program or the Navy college-training program, shall not be included as service in determining the length of time they shall be entitled to education. In other words, a gentleman serves in the Military Academy for years during the war and for another year he would be entitled to all of the veterans' benefits and 1 year of education. Or, taking another example, that he served in the Military Academy for 2 years during the war and then went into service as a commissioned officer and served throughout the balance of the time, which includes time in service as of now, he would be entitled then to education less the 2 years that he was in the Military Academy. But otherwise he is entitled to all of the veterans' benefits. Mr. BRADLEY. I still do not have it clear in my mind. In both cases you mentioned having graduated from the Military Academy at West Point and then serving as an officer. I appreciate that if he served is an officer he would be entitled to it. The thing I am driving at is whether that service at West Point or Annapolis in itself, without ervice as a commissioned officer afterward, give to that midshipman r cadet benefits under the GI bill of rights. That is the same point ve have in relation to the Merchant Marine Academy. I have not een able to find anything which says it does. Mr. MCCANDLESS. Section 10 of Public Law 144, Seventy-eighth ongress, approved July 13, 1943 [57 Stat. p. 556], reads as follows: Service as a cadet at the United States Military Academy or as a midshipman t the United States Naval Academy or as a cadet at the United States Coast uard Academy on or after December 7, 1941, and before termination of hostilies incident to the present war as determined by proclamation of the President by concurrent resolution of the Congress shall be considered active military naval service in World War II for the purposes of laws administered by the eterans' Administration. Mr. ALLEN. I think it covers it as a matter of law. I doubt as a ractical matter that there will be many cadets who would benefit. Mr. BRADLEY. Yes; I would think there might be a great many. here always are a certain number of midshipmen who resign upon mpletion of their course and never have any active service. I am ondering if those are the boys that are covered. Mr. ALLEN. I don't know what the wartime service was but I would inclined to doubt that anyone resigned from any of the academies ho was not subsequently in the service. It is the nature of the mand. Mr. BRADLEY. That is what I am driving at. A midshipman who aduates and resigns, without having accepted his commission, or iving had active service, has completed his course of study and covered in the bill we are considering. But he has had no active rvice. That is the lad I am trying to find out about. Could you have that investigated thoroughly so we can have the swer tomorrow morning? Mr. MCCANDLESS. Yes; I would be delighted to give you that. Mr. MCCANDLESS. Yes, indeed. Mr. ALLEN. The thing I have in mind is that probably resignation der those circumstances would not have been accepted. This is more e factual data we need than the theoretical statement. Mr. BRADLEY. I am trying to see, though, whether this same law pplies to the Navy and Army. I do not know how it was during the ar. But I do know during ordinary times of peace midshipmen and adets graduate, then for one reason or another do not accept their ommissions, many times due to physical disabilities. For that reason hey are not given commissions but they are allowed to graduate. That |