where we had a request to appear before the National Labor Relations Board there are probably 100 foremen. We believe, however, that if unionization of foremen is permitted, it will spread to all plants of all companies.

Mr. DURHAM. Have they aiready started to unionize those fore

men?

Mr. BARTON. They have in this one plant.

Mr. DURHAM. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Harness?

Mr. HARNESS. Mr. Barton, do you think that the problem of your company and others are facing in this matter could be handled if you had the right to appeal from the decisions of these war agencies such as the War Labor Board and the National Labor Relations Board to the courts?

Mr. BARTON. I am unable to say, but it seems to me that it would be too slow a procedure to accomplish the results required today. I think we need very prompt action today. Court procedures are too slow to meet the emergency.

Mr. HARNESS. But as the law now stands, under the court decisions, you have no right to appeal from the decisions of these agencies? Mr. BARTON. That is correct.

Mr. HARNESS. You have no right of appeal to the courts?

Mr. BARTON. No right of appeal.

Mr. HARNESS. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. If that is true, and if there is no appeal from the decision of the War Labor Board, what is the procedure by which you get at a direct proceeding to enjoin enforcement? What would you do?

Mr. BARTON. We have to go along with it, and the production of material is going to suffer.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, as the law now exists the rights of contractors and the rights of property owners are subject to final determination by a bureau or agency of the Government other than the courts.

Mr. HARNESS. I think that is true.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Andrews?
Mr. ANDREWS. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Arends?

Mr. ARENDS. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Barton. The next speaker will be Mr. J. A. Voss.

STATEMENT OF J. A. VOSS, DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, REPUBLIC STEEL CORPORATION, CLEVELAND, OHIO

The CHAIRMAN. Please state your name, your residence, your business, and what your views are with regard to the question of manpower, particularly with respect to the proposals of the Smith bill to amend the Wagner Labor Relations Act.

Mr. Voss. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is J. A. Voss. I live in Cleveland, Ohio. I am director of industrial relations for Republic Steel Corporation. This company is a fully integrated steel company operating iron ore mines, coal mines, blast furnaces, steel plants, and plants which fabricate steel into finished

articles. Its operations are scattered in 45 cities in 11 States throughout the United States. At the present time it employs approximately 70,000 workers, all of whom are engaged in the production of materials vital to the successful operation of the war program.

I desire to address myself specifically to the portion of section 4 of proposed House bill 2239, reading as follows:

He shall be responsible for acts of his executive, administrative, professional. or supervisory employees within the scope of their employment, and such employees shall not be eligible to membership in any labor organization engaging in collective bargaining with the contractor, nor shall such contractor be required to engage in collective bargaining with any labor organization including any of such employees in its membership.

Substantially all of Republic's production and maintenance employees are represented by national labor unions, including the United Steel Workers of America, affiliated with the C. I. O., the United Mine Workers, and various unions affiliated with the American Federation of Labor.

The management of Republic carries on collective bargaining with the largest number of its employees, that is, those who are employed in the blast furnace and steel plants and most of the fabricating plants, under a labor agreement with the United Steel Workers of America, affiliated with the C. I. O.

This labor agreement specifically excludes from the employees covered thereby "executives, foremen, assistant foremen, and supervisors who do not work with tools." It provides in section 13 thereof thatthe management of the plants and the direction of the working force, including the right to hire, suspend, or discharge for proper cause, or transfer, and the right to relieve employees from duty because of lack of work, or for other legitimate reasons, is vested exclusively in the company.

The company and the union have therefore both recognized the fact that the management of the plant must be directed by the company and that superintendents, foremen, assistant foremen, and other supervisory employees are properly part of management and should be excluded from the employees for whom the Union bargains.

The steel plants of the company are large in size, and in most of them several thousand workers are employed. The management of the plant requires a large supervisory personnel. Ordinarily, the management of the plant is vested at the top in a plant manager. Under him each of the departments, which in themselves cover large areas and have many employees, are under the direction of a departmental superintendent. Under each superintendent are a number of foremen and assistant foremen. The plants operate for the most part on a three-shift basis, and there are turn foremen and assistant foremen for each shift. There are approximately 2,600 foremen in Republic's plants and mines and an equal number of assistant foremen. The superintendents, foremen and assistant foremen have the responsibility of directing the work of the employees; have the right to hire and fire; and to discipline workers for infractions of company rules.

The company's contract with the United Steel Workers of America provides that grievances of the workmen shall first be presented to the foreman, who shall pass upon them and attempt to settle them, and thereafter in the event no settlement is effected, to the department superintendent who shall pass upon them and attempt to settle them.

In the performance of all of these functions, all assistant foremen, the foremen, and the department superintendents are acting in behalf of and carrying out the policies of the management of the company. Their position is necessarily different than the position of the workers. It is apparent that if they belonged to the same union as the workers, they would be in an impossible position in carrying out their duties as representatives of management. They could not serve two masters, and serve both faithfully and well.

Republic's labor contract in the coal mines is a closed shop contract, and most of its contracts in its blast furnace plants, steel mills, and fabricating plants, contain a union maintenance of membership clause, which requires every employee who joins the union to remain a member in good standing as a condition of continued employment. In the Appalachian Coal Conference, now in session in New York City, the United Mine Workers are demanding that all our supervisory employees at the coal mines, except the superintendents, be included in the bargaining unit. If supervisory employees belonged to a union, such as the United Mine Workers of America, which operates under a closed-shop contract, their usefulness to the company would disappear. Their very job would depend upon their remaining members in good standing in the union, and you can rest assured they would make no decisions and take no action which might place them in disfavor with their brother union members no matter what might be best for the company in the matter. This is true also with respect to any supervisory employee who should join a union in a plant operating under a union maintenance of membership provision, such as are in effect in practically all Republic's plants.

Even if they belonged to another union, their position would be just as difficult. It is well known that there is today bitter rivalry between large national unions. If the supervisory forces were affiliated with one national union and the employees with another, there would be constant bitterness and hard feelings because the employees would feel that the supervisory employees belonging to another union were not dealing fairly with them. Likewise, in such cases since, under the Wagner Act as construed by the National Labor Relations Board and the courts, the employer is responsible for acts of his supervisory employees, the company would be forced to shoulder full responsibility for acts concerning which it had no knowledge, and which were the result of union rivalry and activities-a subject wholly beyond the control of the company.

If the company is to be responsible for the acts of its supervisory employees, it should be entitled to the full allegiance and loyalty of such employees. It should be entitled to know that in carrying out the many important functions of management, in disciplining and discharging employees, and in handling grievances, many of which involve the payment of substantial sums of the company's money, the supervisory employees are in fact looking out for the interests of the company wholly unaffected by any allegiance they might owe to brother union members.

We sincerely believe that it was not the purpose of Congress when it enacted the Wagner Act to include supervisory employees within the terms of that act. However, you are all aware of the fact that only recently the National Labor Relations Board has determined that supervisory employees may be included in a bargaining unit for

the purpose of bargaining with management. Unless Congress takes action such as is contemplated in the proposed House bill 2239, industry will be faced by a concerted drive by labor unions to force all supervisory employees into their ranks. The impact of such a drive upon the production of sorely needed war materials will be disheartening to the entire country. The confusion and bitterness that will result will inevitably be felt in the loss of ships, planes, tanks and guns. Whatever may be said in support of forcing such an innovation upon industry, no justification exists for broaching the subject in this critical time when the nation is fighting for its very existence.

We urge you to take the necessary action to eliminate this problem from the many difficult problems now confronting industrial management in this country. We believe you can do this by enacting into law a provision which shall render executive, administrative, professional, and supervisory employees, ineligible for membership in labor organizations, and relieve management from dealing with any labor organization which includes any of such employees in its membership. We feel that this House bill 2239 does this and we respectfully request that you report it favorably to the House of Representatives for passage. I would like to give you a brief outline of our organizational set-up in our company. We have a vice president in charge of operations. He has about 25 district managers with whom he meets periodically, when policy matters of the corporation are discussed. These district managers go back to their respective districts and hand these policy matters down to the superintendents of the departments. There are approximately 20 or 30 such superintendents in a plant, depending upon the size of the plant. These superintendents in turn hand down these policies to the foremen. We have always taken the position that the foreman is the lifeblood of management and is a very essential part of management. Our superintendents of the various departments meet with the foremen at regular intervals, in many instances weekly, to keep the foremen posted on what is going on in the department and in the company, so as to build them up to the point where they are acquainted with the policies of the management and can properly administer those policies among the workers.

We believe that if foremen are taken away from management and made a part of a labor organization, a very essential part of management will be taken away, and it is going to be very difficult to administer these policies and operate the plants. Many of these foremen are on a competitive basis with respect to production, with respect to safety records and accident prevention, and with respect to cost. It is this competition and the constant daily contacts of superintendents with foremen that keep our organization going and our plants operating at the highest possible efficiency today.

The CHAIRMAN. I believe you stated that your company in all its various plants, including the coal mines, employs about 70,000 people? Mr. Voss. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. There are about 2,600 foremen and 2,600 assistant foremen in all that group?

Mr. Voss. Yes, sir; approximately.

The CHAIRMAN. That would be 5,200 all told?

Mr. Voss. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Are your coal mines captive mines?

Mr. Voss. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. That is, the company itself owns them, and those mines produce the coal which is needed in the manufacture of your steel?

Mr. Voss. Yes, sir; and the coal is all used in our own steel plants. The CHAIRMAN. In what areas of the country are those coal mines located?

Mr. Voss. In Pennsylvania and Alabama.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know the tonnage of coal which you consume each year?

Mr. Voss. No; I do not.

The CHAIRMAN. It is very large, I imagine?

Mr. Voss. Yes; it is.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know anything about the productivity or the capacity of your coal mines?

Mr. Voss. No; I do not. I do not have that information, Mr. Chairman, but I will be glad to furnish it to the committee if you wish me to do so.

The CHAIRMAN. You have referred to the difficulty of having foremen who are organized into a union of workers keep in contact with the workers and move harmoniously with them and at the same time be in harmony with the owners and the company holding the contract. Would the enactment of the provisions of the Smill bill, which this committee is now considering, make that question perfectly clear and prevent the organization of this personnel, do you think?

Mr. Voss. I believe it would.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the provision in which you concur?
Mr. Voss. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. In what way do you figure that the manpower supply of the country would be affected by the enactment of this legislation? In what way would it have an effect, favorable or unfavorable, upon war production?

Mr. Voss. If foremen and supervisors are permitted to organize, we are going to be confronted with many situations from the standpoint of unionization, and these men are going to drift away from the management problems. They are going to drift away from management problems and discussion of management problems and are going to be thinking along different lines than they are today. I do not believe that a foreman can belong to a union and be loyal to a union and at the same time remain on management's side of the table, which is today and has always been very essential. I say that because of that situation, thrown into the picture today, we are going to have conflict in our supervisory forces, and naturally that is going to be reflected in production.

Let me say this: In our own organization, was widely scattered as it is throughout the country, we are not confronted with problems like that today. Our supervisory forces are handled through departmental superintendents. We are getting along fine; but to throw something like this out today is certainly going to affect the production, the attitude of the foremen, and the attitude of management, and the whole picture, I think, will be distorted.

The CHAIRMAN. As a matter of fact, what has led to the campaign of organization of the superivisory personnel of industry in the country is the decision of the National Labor Relations Board in the case of the Union Collieries Coal Co., of Oakmont, Pa.; is not that right?