AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE COLLECTION OF UNION DUES BY EMPLOYER

Mr. TABER. Where do you get your authority to require an employer to collect union dues out of the employees without specific authority from them?

Dr. TAYLOR. It becomes the responsibility of the War Labor Board to resolve disputes which might interfere with the successful progress of the war.

As you know, when we started in business and just handled the dispute cases, the question of union security, which is union status, was one which was the most important problem before us. We had not been thinking of wage problems at that time as our major problems. We were thinking of this question of union security; and the demands on the one side, as you know, were for a union shop or a closed shop with mandatory payment of dues. On the other side it was for no union security; and the Board had to resolve that issue. We think we have resolved it in such a way as to protect both groups.

I realize that there is some difference of opinion that still prevails. The whole question of union security centers around the question of the maintenance of union membership that develops very quickly in some cases with the requirement to pay dues. It seemed to us that the requirement of union membership, to keep in good standing with the union, was closely related to the payment of dues.

In passing it might be of some interest to you to know that many employers say, "We did not acquiesce in the maintenance of membership provisions, but we think that the provision should be accompanied by the provision asking employers to deduct dues."

There is a great sentiment in industry to the effect that the two should go together. It seems that many industry members, including some on our Board, feel that the questions of dues payment and the maintenance of membership should be considered together. The Board very frequently does so, and they consider a dues collection case along with a maintenance of membership case, with the Board's responsibility to resolve labor disputes. One of our big disputes was the question of union security, and in resolving those disputes under the War Labor Disputes Act, it is the Board's responsibility to settle issues customarily included in collective bargaining contracts.

Mr. KHEEL. The dues-collection matter is customarily included in collective-bargaining agreements.

EXPLANATION OF CHANGES OF LANGUAGE

Mr. CANNON. Suppose you insert in the record at this point a statement explaining the various changes in language that you propose here, going into that in some detail.

Dr. TAYLOR. This is an explanation of the proposed changes i language in the appropriations.

1. To equalize the rate of compensation of alternate public members and of the Executive Director with that of the public members.

(a) See letter of March 29, 1945, from the Director of the Bureau of the Budget, incorporated in the committee print.

(b) See also Executive Order No. 9535 placing all public members on equal status.

(c) Since there has been no difference in the work of the four public and the four alternate public members-it is proposed to equalize the salaries of the two groups at $10,000 per annum. In this connection I should like to call attention to page 267 of hearings, national war agencies appropriation bill, 1945.

2. Travel of new appointees to places of employment outside continental United States, and return to the place of their actual residence. (a) It is believed that recruitment of suitable personnel will be substantially facilitated by the inclusion of this language. The clause was borrowed and adopted from the 1945 appropriation for the War Department.

3. $50,000 for penalty mail.

(a) Required by section 2 of the Act of June 24, 1944 (Public Law 264). See also page 84 of "Justifications."

4. Payment of witness fees.

(a) The War Labor Disputes Act vested in the National War Labor Board the power of subpena. There is, however, no clearly spelled out authorization to the War Labor Board to pay witness fees. Hence, the proposed insertion. The clause was borrowed and adopted from the 1945 appropriation for the Office of Defense Transportation.

5. Travel and subsistence of W. A. E. members of the Board and its agencies.

(a) This is an area where no clear-cut definition of a "consultant"presently authorized to be compensated for travel and subsistence exists in the appropriations of the fiscal years 1943-45. Consequently, the Comptroller General in his letter to the Board of January 5, 1945, B-46471, suggested as follows:

The matter would be one for presentation to, and consideration by the Congress. See, for instance, the authority contained in the same appropriation act here considered under the heading "War Production Board" for payment of such traveling expenses to "Compliance Commissioners."

The clause was borrowed and adopted from the W. P. B. appropriation for the fiscal year 1945.

Mr. CANNON. Thank you very much, Dr. Taylor.

THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 1945.

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. LEWIS B. HERSHEY, DIRECTOR, ACCOMPANIED BY COL. JOSEPH B. MITCHELL, BUDGET OFFICER; LT. COL. A. R. BOONE, ASSISTANT BUDGET OFFICER; AND K. H. MCGILL, CHIEF OF THE RESEARCH AND STATISTICS DIVISION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Mr. CANNON. General Hershey, we have an estimate before us for the Selective Service System for 1946. For 1945 you had an approtriation of $62,500,000, which includes $6,827,883 for overtime, which Sot estimated for 1946.

Your estimate for 1946 is $54,500,000, so therefore there is a net reduction of $1,173,000 for comparable items in 1945.

GENERAL STATEMENT

We will be glad if you will give us a general statement indicating any changes in organizational procedure since your last appearance before the committee, and also in reference to the manpower situation, especially with reference to its influence at this time and the influence of your service at this time on the situation in agriculture. General HERSHEY. Mr. Chairman, Selective Service during the current fiscal year probably records the lowest activity we have had since the first year of our existence. This occurred between the first of the fiscal year and January 1945. Since that time there has been quite an increase in activity, however. The best estimate I can make now is that we will be called upon to produce fewer than 100,000 men a month after July 1.

We have made some reduction in our personnel, mainly in the local boards. Personnel and the cost of transporting registrants are the two largest items in our Budget.

If the calls are low, obviously we will not need so much money for transportation. But there is an irreducible minimum in personnel for the 6,441 local boards below which we cannot go, and during this fiscal year we have come pretty close to that minimum. Congress requires at least 1 local board in each county in the United States, and that suggests a limitation on the consolidation of local boards to take care of the situation regarding clerical help.

We will be producing an average of 93,000 registrants each month, and from a quantitative standpoint, that is not as much of a job as we have had at other times.

Unfortunately, the sources of supply are very low, and the necessity of finding registrants, especially those above 18 years of age who furnish only about half the number, requires a great deal of work on the part of local board clerks.

ENLISTMENTS AND INDUCTIONS

As to the manpower situation, we are producing at this time (April) about 130,000 altogether, or about 100,000 for the Army and 30,000 for the Navy. Next month these numbers will decline 12,000 to 13,000, due to reduction in the Navy call.

This Navy reduction is not what it appears to be on the surface. The Navy probably will continue to get about the same total number of men next month as in the past. It has enlisted as many as 38,000 17-year olds during some recent months which eventually cuts deeply into our supply of 18-year-old registrants. This means that while the newspapers will say the Navy call has dropped 50 percent, the difference is made up by taking men from the source of filling our calls. The number of men that the Navy will take next month is just as great, if not a little greater, than it was this month. But about twothirds or more will come from the 17-year old recruiting next month, whereas this month the situation is somewhat reversed in that we are furnishing about two-thirds and they are enlisting about one-third. Mr. CANNON. But next month, with the reduced calls, naturally that must affect the number inducted.

General HERSHEY. It will affect the number inducted in May. It will make a difference of 12,000, but the source from which the men

are coming that is, the potential 18-year-olds-will likewise be reduced about 12,000 before they register with us. Not only that, but their enlistment is directly attributable to our failure to register these men when they became 18.

AGRICULTURAL DEFERMENTS

Mr. CANNON. What about agriculture?

General HERSHEY. As of April 1 we had deferred for agricultural reasons, somewhere around 255,000 men under 26 years old. In all other occupational deferments under 26, there were 105,000 of which all but 30,000 were accounted for by the merchant marine and foreign armies.

I think the withdrawals from agricultural deferment into class I-A since last July have averaged somewhere around 25,000 to 30,000 per month. The term "withdrawal" does not mean that they went into the armed forces. It means that they were forwarded for physical examination, and if they passed, they were selected for induction. If they were rejected, they became IV-F's and they may or may not have remained in agriculture; many times they did.

I do not believe the actual number going into the service has been any greater since than it was before January 2, 1945, which was the date of the letter from the Director of War Mobilization. The fact that local boards probably were getting down to the point where they found more men were needed in agriculture, the discussion of the matter, and the impending legislation would have a very decided effect on a man who is a local board member. He lives in the community and would tend to feel that if he inducts a man today there may be legislation tomorrow which will prevent his induction. So I think the discussion since January probably has had some retarding effect on the induction of farmers.

Mr. CANNON. What would be the effect of legislation passed by the Senate and the House?

General HERSHEY. Anything I would say would simply be a foreeast, but I personally believe that the local boards have been much more aware of the Tydings amendment than they have been given credit for. In a lot of places I do not believe, honestly, that the additional legislation can make very much difference, because I do not believe that the local boards have done a poor job in the matter. There have been some exceptions, but 1,000 or 2,000 exceptions out of 300,000 is not very much for the United States as a whole. This is only a private opinion, but I do not think it will make much difference, provided you keep on calling men. That is the thing that makes it difficult in connection with what we are talking about. As long as the local boards have to produce a certain number of men, they, in their good judgment, will not take a man, if they have a choice, of 33, 34, 35, or 36 years of age with quite a large family. They will be more inclined to take a young fellow, unmarried, and they will take him because they believe he can be replaced, or because they believe he is not necessary, and because Congress did not attempt to legislate on anything except essentiality. That is the way I evaluate it. If the calls become very heavy, we may have to take everybody. It is just a case of producing the men.

EFFECT OF CLOSE OF EUROPEAN WAR UPON INDUCTIONS

Mr. CANNON. If the calls fall off, that would make a difference? What effect would the end of the European war have? Of course, I realize that we will proceed as if we expected the war to last indefinitely General HERSHEY. I cannot, of course, pose as an authority, but it is my understanding that under the present plan, unless something interferes, we will produce somewhere around 100,000 a month for both services.

In the second place, I think the Army proposes, or they are so announcing, that they will let out men with 4 or 5 years' service. Mr. CANNON. You do not expect any great change of procedure within the next calendar year?

General HERSHEY. 30,000 to 35,000 will come each month as now from the newly registering 18-year-olds, but we will still have to produce between 90,000 and 95,000.

Do not misunderstand me. I will produce 130,000 or so if I have to, but as far as the local boards are concerned, with only one or two clerks, the production of 93,000 will be difficult enough.

CLERICAL HIRE

I will say something about the money spent on mileage, but before I get to that I will say that we do not spend anything unless we have to send men up. As far as clerical hire is concerned, I think a local board with only one clerk is about as small a staff as you can have, if you are going to maintain the boards. I think we are coming today to the irreducible personnel which we must have if we are going to operate as we are operating now. Each one of these clerks, however, represents the part-time work of nine other people who work for nothing.

Mr. CANNON. How many people are giving you voluntary service? General HERSHEY. About 180,000.

STRENGTH OF THE NAVY

Mr. LUDLOW. How much is the Navy below its authorized strength now?

General HERSHEY. I believe their authorized strength is about 4,000,000. I think they were around 100,000 short of 4,000,000 on March 1.

Mr. TABER. Are they not practically there now? How far short are they?

General HERSHEY. This statement shows that they are 84,000 short.

Mr. TABER. When they put their testimony in before the subcommittee in charge of the naval appropriations bill they estimated that the way things were going there would only be about 9,000 short on the 30th of June.

General HERSHEY. My figure is as of March 1.

Mr. TABER. These figures are their own figures and not the figures of anybody else. They practically are up to date on that. General HERSHEY. Yes, sir. I think that is true.

Mr. SNYDER. I understood you to say that the authorized strength of the Navy was 4,000,000.