Page images

For the week ending July 25, production, Mr. Chairman, on a national basis because of the strike or strikes was down to 10,140,000 tons.

For the week ending August 1 the tonnage was down to 9,955,000. The normal average weekly production, as I understand it, nationwide is 11 to 12 million tons.

For the week to end tomorrow, August 8, the total of production will apparently be back to 10.5 million tons. As I understand it further, the major production losses today, as of this date of the hearing, are in Harlan County, Ky., and Logan County, W. Va.

Mr. Yablonski, you have spoken, as other witnesses have spoken, and as members of the subcommittee also have agreed, that the provisions of the 1969 Health and Safety Act were not being enforced. There has been no mention made, Mr. Chairman, during these recent hearings of the enforcement policies within the State agencies.

They have regulations by which the States are to operate. I am not sure whether you, Mr. Yablonski, or someone else wishes to speak to this point. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important that we have reports from some of the States that are concerned with their own regulatory agencies.

I think Senator Schweiker has indicated at least in part, and I would not want to speak for him, that in Pennsylvania there have been problems within the State agency. I am not sure about that, but I think that concern has been expressed.

Senator SCHWEIKER. No, I haven't said that.
Senator RANDOLPH. I am wrong?
Senator SCHWEIKER. Yes.
Senator RANDOLPH. I will strike that from the record myself.

Senator Williams. I want to say I certainly agree. We are fortunate to have Mrs. Mazie Gutshall, executive deputy secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral Industries. We have the assistant director of West Virginia's Bureau of Mines, Mr. Paul Riley, as you know, for today.

Senator RANDOLPH. When did I receive this information that these persons would testify? ?

Senator WILLIAMS. Just 30 seconds after I did.
Senator RANDOLPH. When did you get it?
Senator WILLIAMS. I just picked it up here.
Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you.

Mr. TRBOVICH. Senator, I would like to say one thing before you go any further. There is too much emphasis placed on the royalty from the tonnage they are getting. This is the position the UMW takes. They multiply the 40 cents a ton by the tons we are losing and they are saying you had better go back to work if you want benefits or if you want more benefits.

I think there is too much emphasis placed on the royalty from this coal where they should be working on sa fety.

Senator RANDOLPH. I think that is a comment that the subcommittee would well receive. I made it very clear I made no comment on the figures whatsoever.

Mr. TRBOVICH. Right.

Senator RANDOLPH. Only that it was the information that had been provided by the U.S. Government in these strikes that have occurred. We do know that in certain areas, Mike, apparently there have been

certain reasons for the strike at one point and other reasons at another point.

I am informed that this is true. Maybe I am incorrectly informed. But I want to repeat what I said, that the miner often feels that his safety and his health is impaired by the work that he carried on in the mine, he has not only the opportunity, I think he has the responsibility.

I realize that he can't do this as one person. It has to be a multiple matter. That is why I said further that he has the responsibility to work with others and to give them his feelings about the problem that exists.

Now the State agencies question you feel, Mr. Chairman, that does not need to be discussed! I was only thinking that some of these witnesses might wish to comment and I am not going to belabor that point. We can pass it by on the State agency.

Mr. YABLONSKI. These strikes, particularly the Pennsylvania one, that was in northern West Virginia and Ohio also, the one that is presently going on in West Virginia focussed national attention on the loss of production at a critical time so far as our national economy is concerned and the power shortage and everything else.

But I want to call to your attention, Senator, that it is a little bit like Farmington. It goes on all the time. I think the subcommittee has requested information which I believe shows that on the average over the last 3 or 4 years some 700,000 man-shifts are lost due to wildcat strikes.

If we just take the figure of 15-tons per man, we are talking there about something far in excess of what has been lost in West Virginia today. Again I say that without any comment, but just for the committee's information of just what a wildcat-prone industry this is.

Senator RANDOLPH. I am sure what you are saying is correct. Of course, regardless of the exact amount of money, it does lessen the welfare fund, is that correct?

Senator RANDOLPH. To whatever point it might be.

One final question : On your statement on page 8, Mr. Yablonski, in the final paragraph on that page, you have stated the quickest way to get effective safety in the mines is to call a halt to the union's romance with the coal operators.

I do not urge you to make a fuller discussion, but I think it might be helpful to the committee. We might be indulging in a generalization a little when we talk of “romance.” I want you to be specific as to what you feel.

Mr. Y ABLONSKI. I think this is essentially the crux of what we were discussing earlier. There is entirely too much harmony between the union and the industry. If this law is to be enforced, the union has to go out and start pinpointing, it has to start saying, you never picked up the United Mine Workers journal in the last 5 years and read of any company that is under contract being criticized for its safety policy.

I think the union could be very effective. The idea of working handin-glove with the industry to promote it and things of that nature may be all well and good, but it should come to an end when coal safety is involved, because the men have to rely on the union.

The companies are interested in production and it is a natural colJective bargaining of countervailing forces that we are talking about. I think the union association in NCPC, I think that the attitude that they have taken over the years of never being critical of the industry except to criticize the industry, as I said earlier if Bethlehem Steel runs good mines, let us praise Bethlehem.

If Consolidated Coal Co. runs good mines, let us praise them. If some company runs bad mines, let us tell all coal miners.

After all, as you pointed out earlier, it is a coal miners' market. Today they can pick and choose where they work. Today if Clinchfield is killing men in Virginia, these men ought to know it because they dont have to work there. They can work for U.S. Steel if the Gary mines are safe.

We have asked the Bureau—and I think the Bureau is going to move in this area of providing statistics, accident rate, fatalities, and everything else on a company-by-company basis, so that those who do have safety records can hold them up and say we do run sa fe mines. Over the years our fatality rate has been half of what the industry has been.

Our accident rate is, with the built-in problems that Mr. Trbovich has described, one-fourth of what the general norm is in the industry. We think that this is really a great way of saying to companies, shape up or ship out.

We are encouraging the Department to work right along this line. I think, Senator, this really points out. You were indicating yesterday that there has to be greater cooperation and by such statement you were meaning to say that the union has to work more closely without the traditional give and take, then I do object.

I don't think you take that position. Senator RANDOLPH. No, I do not. If it were read to you at this point, you will find that I said the Congress itself must take a portion of this criticism.

Mr. YABLONSKI. Then I apologize, because I thought you meant you were endorsing the

Senator RANDOLPH. We will place it in the record. I can't recall the exact words,

I said very frankly that I wanted to bear part of the blame, I thought the Congress must bear part of the blame. I spoke of the different elements that I thought are involved with shortcomings and mistakes and errors and the record so indicates.

Now, I think there is a responsibility, Mr. Yablonski, within let us say partially the jurisdiction that we have, although there are reasons sometimes that are very motivating that can permit you, in fact, to bring about a responsibility for you to speak just beyond what your jurisdiction is.

I think that is true on the legitimate matters. Our major task is to pass legislation, to consider legislation, and then it has been written and passed we are doing something now in the Congress very frankly that we didn't do 5 or 10 years ago.

Mr. YABLONSKI. You should be applauded for it, too.

Senator RANDOLPH. The Congress is coming back to look at the implementation of the act or other laws, because I use the word advisedly-often the action of the Congress is subverted by the agency or agencies that carry forward the law which has been written.

I do not refer just to this measure alone, but that has been discovered or determined by so-called oversight hearings, not only within this committee, but I have been doing it time and time again in the Public Works Committee in reference to air and water pollution and other major subjects, economic development, the environment generally, including the housing and dislocation of people.

So I think there is a responsibility of the Congress, of the union, of the ownership.

Mr. YABLONSKI. And of the men, too.

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes, and I so said earlier. I pinpointed that. I think there is a multiple responsibility on all of us to ferret out and bring to the attention, to make it known when health and safety under an act is not being observed, because there has been failure to bring stringency into being, particularly with reference to inspections which are written into this law.

Mr. TRBOVISH. Senator, I would just like to say one more thing and then I am going to stop.

Senator WILLIAMs. I will say that you can remain if there are any further inquiries to be made or if you have anything more to say after our other scheduled witnesses come on.

I know I will be available to sit. It might be wiser if you do stay.

Senator RANDOLPH. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that Mike performed today as if he had been here before because he asked you if you would yield to him.

Senator WILLIAMS. I know, he has all of the protocol.
Senator RANDOLPH. He has all the parlance of the Senator.
Senator WILLIAMS. We will ask you, will you yield at this time?
Mr. TRBOVICH. Yes, I will, Senator.
Senator Williams. For the Department of the Interior-

Mr. Y ABLONSKI. I would like to introduce a comparison of the nature of the different kinds of inspections that were involved in the Pittsburgh litigation. I would like to offer them into evidence, because I think they disclose the difference between the present PBR inspections and the old ones.

(The information referred to is available in the files of the subcommittee.)

(A letter to Senator Williams subsequently received follows:)

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

At the recent hearings of tne Subcommittee, M

Joseph A. Yablonski, Jr. and i1r. Mike Trbovich testified on a number of matters in which they were in error and the record needs to be corrected.

First, Mr. Trbovich stated that three nine safety committeemen, namely, Messrs. James Holland, Harry Baker and Jerry Hendricks were discharged because they objected to unsafe conditions; that Mr. liolland went to District 6 and asked for help but they would not meet with him; that the men had to close the industry down for threc weeks and, as a result, the company finally caved in and reinstated him.

The facts are as follows:

These men were discharged on February 5, 1970 when they asked the foreman to shut down one section of the mine to catch up on rock dusting. When the foreman refused their request, the safety committee asked if they could go outside to talk to district officials or someone with authority. Tnis request was refused, but all the men came outside and the three safety committeemen were discharged. The district representatives, including William Howard District 6 Safety Coordinator, met the following morning at 10:00 a.m. with about thirty members of the local union. After a preliminary investigation of the facts William Howard requested the United States Bureau of vines to make an immediate inspection of the mine. District representative Leonard McVey immediately contacted the managernent of the Allison Mine, which is owned by the Y & O Coal Conpany, and advised them that the discharge was in violation of the 1963 contract and that the men must be reinstated.

« PreviousContinue »